From: Paul Clements <paul.clements@steeleye.com>
To: Farkas Levente <lfarkas@bppiac.hu>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sofware raid5 oops
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:39:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42D2CAF3.40706@steeleye.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42D22A3B.1000608@bppiac.hu>
Farkas Levente wrote:
> anybody has any useful tip about it?
> Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000000
> printing eip:
> 00000000
> *pde = 0f94a067
> Oops: 0000 [#1]
> Modules linked in: cifs nls_utf8 ncpfs nfsd exportfs lockd sunrpc parport_pc lp parport netconsole netdump i2c_dev i2c_core ipx dm_mod e1000 tg3 floppy ext3 jbd raid5 xor raid1 3w_xxxx sd_mod scsi_mod
> CPU: 0
> EIP: 0060:[<00000000>] Not tainted VLI
> EFLAGS: 00010246 (2.6.9-11.106.unsupported)
> EIP is at 0x0
> eax: c1806138 ebx: c018961c ecx: 00000016 edx: c035c7f4
> esi: e7182200 edi: 00000001 ebp: c18fb380 esp: f7878f34
> ds: 007b es: 007b ss: 0068
> Process md2_raid5 (pid: 224, threadinfo=f7878000 task=f7872600)
> Stack: f7b973c0 f8879a26 md_thread+0x20d/0x23a
> [<c011ceaf>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2d
> [<c030ce1a>] ret_from_fork+0x6/0x14
> [<c011ceaf>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2d
> [<c02a183f>] md_thread+0x0/0x23a
> [<c01041d9>] kernel_thread_helper+0x5/0xb
> Code: Bad EIP value.
>
> Pid: 224, comm: md2_raid5
> EIP: 0060:[<00000000>] CPU: 0
> EIP is at 0x0
> EFLAGS: 00010246 Not tainted (2.6.9-11.106.unsupported)
> EAX: c1806138 EBX: c018961c ECX: 00000016 EDX: c035c7f4
> ESI: e7182200 EDI: 00000001 EBP: c18fb380 DS: 007b ES: 007b
> CR0: 8005003b CR2: ffffffd5 CR3: 0fd6b000 CR4: 000006d0
> [<f8879a26>] handle_stripe+0xfca/0x1207 [raid5]
> [<f887a7d5>] raid5d+0x197/0x2ab [raid5]
> [<c02a1a4c>] md_thread+0x20d/0x23a
> [<c011ceaf>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2d
> [<c030ce1a>] ret_from_fork+0x6/0x14
> [<c011ceaf>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2d
> [<c02a183f>] md_thread+0x0/0x23a
> [<c01041d9>] kernel_thread_helper+0x5/0xb
We're in handle_stripe with an EIP of 0. Perhaps a NULL end io function
in the following:
(raid5.c, line ~1252):
while ((bi=return_bi)) {
int bytes = bi->bi_size;
return_bi = bi->bi_next;
bi->bi_next = NULL;
bi->bi_size = 0;
bi->bi_end_io(bi, bytes, 0);
}
Is it valid to assume that bi_end_io is non-NULL in this context?
--
Paul
prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-07-11 19:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-07-11 8:13 sofware raid5 oops Farkas Levente
2005-07-11 19:39 ` Paul Clements [this message]
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=42D2CAF3.40706@steeleye.com \
--to=paul.clements@steeleye.com \
--cc=lfarkas@bppiac.hu \
--cc=linux-raid@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).