From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id n3NGAdI8014191 for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:10:40 -0500 Received: from eu1sys200aog106.obsmtp.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id D69F314444B6 for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:13:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eu1sys200aog106.obsmtp.com (eu1sys200aog106.obsmtp.com [207.126.144.121]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id AstgCvjN0t8rNOGZ for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:13:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <49F092D6.4070507@st.com> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 17:09:58 +0100 From: Stuart MENEFY MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Help debugging a use after free References: <49E37972.1070101@st.com> <49E4DF8C.4050800@thebarn.com> <49E8A081.7020200@st.com> <20090419081702.GD16929@discord.disaster> In-Reply-To: <20090419081702.GD16929@discord.disaster> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: Russell Cattelan , xfs@oss.sgi.com Dave Chinner wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 04:30:09PM +0100, Stuart MENEFY wrote: >>> If you can instrument actually free that is causing the problem it >>> would be good to print out the >>> actually pid doing the free and as many return addresses that you can, >>> so we can get an >>> idea of the actual call chain. >> The free is coming from the xfssyncd thread, the back trace looks like: >> >> [<8418d0e2>] xfs_idestroy+0x22/0x100 >> [<8418a1b0>] xfs_ireclaim+0x50/0x80 >> [<841ad7f2>] xfs_finish_reclaim+0x32/0x1c0 >> [<841ada30>] xfs_finish_reclaim_all+0xb0/0x100 >> [<8418a780>] xfs_ilock_nowait+0x0/0x160 >> [<841a9df2>] xfs_syncsub+0x52/0x360 >> [<84335108>] schedule_timeout+0x48/0x100 >> [<841ab684>] xfs_sync+0x24/0x40 >> [<841e0ce0>] list_add+0x0/0x20 >> [<841c041c>] vfs_sync+0x1c/0x40 >> [<841bf37c>] vfs_sync_worker+0x1c/0x60 >> [<841bf6b6>] xfssyncd+0xb6/0x140 >> [<8402f0dc>] kthread+0x3c/0x80 >> [<84012440>] complete+0x0/0x60 >> [<841bf600>] xfssyncd+0x0/0x140 >> [<8402f060>] kthread_should_stop+0x0/0x20 >> [<84003984>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x20 >> [<8402f0a0>] kthread+0x0/0x80 >> [<84003980>] kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x20 > > There were some use-after-free fixes in .27 timeframe to the inode > reclaim code. Can you reeetest with a more recent kernel? Possibly. I have a half-finished port of 2.6.27-rc4 to our hardware which I could probably get going fairly quickly. Do you think that would be sufficient to pick up the use-after-free fixes? Thanks Stuart _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs