From: Minlan Wang <wangminlan@huawei.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>, <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 3.12-rc2 nfsd oops in nfsd_cache_lookup
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 11:33:42 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131203033342.GA8877@f18.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131202172547.GA5211@infradead.org>
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 09:25:47AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 12:22:19PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > Looks like a similar oops to the one reported here:
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1025907
> >
> > Do you have a way to reproduce this reliably?
>
> Seem to happen about 2/3s of the time when running xfstests on a v3
> export for me. The other one third create a different lockup in the
> same test that I'm looking at at the moment.
>
I reviewed the code of nfsd_cache_lookup(), this part makes me
suspicious:
in nfsd_cache_lookup():
The first entry in lru_head is keeped for recycle later:
if (!list_empty(&lru_head)) {
rp = list_first_entry(&lru_head, struct svc_cacherep, c_lru);
if (nfsd_cache_entry_expired(rp) ||
num_drc_entries >= max_drc_entries) {
lru_put_end(rp);
prune_cache_entries();
goto search_cache;
}
}
But in prune_cache_entries(), there's no guarantee that it won't be freed: if
all entries in lru_head is expired, all of them will be freed.
So, later in the search_cache part, if rp from the first entry in lru_head is reused, would we
run into some illegal memory acess, or the problem happened in this
thread?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-03 3:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-01 10:29 3.12-rc2 nfsd oops in nfsd_cache_lookup Christoph Hellwig
2013-12-02 17:22 ` Jeff Layton
2013-12-02 17:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-12-03 3:33 ` Minlan Wang [this message]
2013-12-03 10:59 ` Jeff Layton
2013-12-04 0:55 ` Minlan Wang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131203033342.GA8877@f18.localdomain \
--to=wangminlan@huawei.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).