* problem w/ kgdb serial port on 2.6.0 & 2.6.1
@ 2004-01-16 20:32 Terence Ripperda, tripperda
2004-01-20 9:41 ` George Anzinger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Terence Ripperda, tripperda @ 2004-01-16 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List; +Cc: Terence Ripperda
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2062 bytes --]
when trying to use the newest kgdb patches against both 2.6.0 and 2.6.1, I ran into a boot-time kernel oops in the serial port code. this would happen shortly after connecting to a remote gdb, on a Dell M60 laptop.
I don't have the actual oops message anymore, but I have a patch that fixed things for me. not sure if the patch is correct, so here's the info:
the oops happened in serial_core.c:uart_match_port(struct uart_port *port1, struct uart_port *port2). the problem was that port1 was NULL, causing an oops on this code (I've added printks in my file, so the line numbers would be off):
static int uart_match_port(struct uart_port *port1, struct uart_port *port2)
{
if (port1->iotype != port2->iotype)
return 0;
this was called from uart_find_match_or_unused(struct uart_driver *drv, struct uart_port *port), here:
for (i = 0; i < drv->nr; i++)
if (uart_match_port(drv->state[i].port, port))
return &drv->state[i];
I added printks to get a better idea of what's going on and see this:
Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_register_driver (will alloc state)
Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 1
Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 3
Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 4
Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 5
Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 6
Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 7
are the ports added supposed to be sequential? it looks like drv->state[i].port is filled in as needed, but uart_find_match_or_unused() seems to expect all drv->state[i] for i = 0 && i < drv->nr.
I "fixed" this in my kernel by adding checks for drv->state[i].port being non-null before trying to use it, and everything works great (patch attached). but I'm not sure if that's the correct solution, or if the ports should be added sequentially instead of as they are. I'm more than happy to run more tests and get more information.
Thanks,
Terence
[-- Attachment #2: linux-2.6.1_serial_kgdb.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1012 bytes --]
--- serial_core.c 2004-01-16 14:20:15.000000000 -0600
+++ serial_core.c.new 2004-01-16 14:19:43.000000000 -0600
@@ -2304,7 +2304,7 @@
* then we can't register the port.
*/
for (i = 0; i < drv->nr; i++)
- if (uart_match_port(drv->state[i].port, port))
+ if (drv->state[i].port && uart_match_port(drv->state[i].port, port))
return &drv->state[i];
/*
@@ -2313,7 +2313,8 @@
* used (indicated by zero iobase).
*/
for (i = 0; i < drv->nr; i++)
- if (drv->state[i].port->type == PORT_UNKNOWN &&
+ if (drv->state[i].port &&
+ drv->state[i].port->type == PORT_UNKNOWN &&
drv->state[i].port->iobase == 0 &&
drv->state[i].count == 0)
return &drv->state[i];
@@ -2323,7 +2324,8 @@
* entry which doesn't have a real port associated with it.
*/
for (i = 0; i < drv->nr; i++)
- if (drv->state[i].port->type == PORT_UNKNOWN &&
+ if (drv->state[i].port &&
+ drv->state[i].port->type == PORT_UNKNOWN &&
drv->state[i].count == 0)
return &drv->state[i];
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: problem w/ kgdb serial port on 2.6.0 & 2.6.1
2004-01-16 20:32 problem w/ kgdb serial port on 2.6.0 & 2.6.1 Terence Ripperda, tripperda
@ 2004-01-20 9:41 ` George Anzinger
2004-01-21 17:13 ` Terence Ripperda, tripperda
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: George Anzinger @ 2004-01-20 9:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Terence Ripperda; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
Uh, which kgdb? The one from Andrew's mm tree or the one from souceforge?
George
tripperda@nvidia.com wrote:
> when trying to use the newest kgdb patches against both 2.6.0 and 2.6.1, I ran into a boot-time kernel oops in the serial port code. this would happen shortly after connecting to a remote gdb, on a Dell M60 laptop.
>
> I don't have the actual oops message anymore, but I have a patch that fixed things for me. not sure if the patch is correct, so here's the info:
>
> the oops happened in serial_core.c:uart_match_port(struct uart_port *port1, struct uart_port *port2). the problem was that port1 was NULL, causing an oops on this code (I've added printks in my file, so the line numbers would be off):
>
> static int uart_match_port(struct uart_port *port1, struct uart_port *port2)
> {
> if (port1->iotype != port2->iotype)
> return 0;
>
> this was called from uart_find_match_or_unused(struct uart_driver *drv, struct uart_port *port), here:
>
> for (i = 0; i < drv->nr; i++)
> if (uart_match_port(drv->state[i].port, port))
> return &drv->state[i];
>
>
> I added printks to get a better idea of what's going on and see this:
>
> Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_register_driver (will alloc state)
> Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 1
> Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 3
> Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 4
> Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 5
> Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 6
> Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 7
>
> are the ports added supposed to be sequential? it looks like drv->state[i].port is filled in as needed, but uart_find_match_or_unused() seems to expect all drv->state[i] for i = 0 && i < drv->nr.
>
> I "fixed" this in my kernel by adding checks for drv->state[i].port being non-null before trying to use it, and everything works great (patch attached). but I'm not sure if that's the correct solution, or if the ports should be added sequentially instead of as they are. I'm more than happy to run more tests and get more information.
>
> Thanks,
> Terence
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> --- serial_core.c 2004-01-16 14:20:15.000000000 -0600
> +++ serial_core.c.new 2004-01-16 14:19:43.000000000 -0600
> @@ -2304,7 +2304,7 @@
> * then we can't register the port.
> */
> for (i = 0; i < drv->nr; i++)
> - if (uart_match_port(drv->state[i].port, port))
> + if (drv->state[i].port && uart_match_port(drv->state[i].port, port))
> return &drv->state[i];
>
> /*
> @@ -2313,7 +2313,8 @@
> * used (indicated by zero iobase).
> */
> for (i = 0; i < drv->nr; i++)
> - if (drv->state[i].port->type == PORT_UNKNOWN &&
> + if (drv->state[i].port &&
> + drv->state[i].port->type == PORT_UNKNOWN &&
> drv->state[i].port->iobase == 0 &&
> drv->state[i].count == 0)
> return &drv->state[i];
> @@ -2323,7 +2324,8 @@
> * entry which doesn't have a real port associated with it.
> */
> for (i = 0; i < drv->nr; i++)
> - if (drv->state[i].port->type == PORT_UNKNOWN &&
> + if (drv->state[i].port &&
> + drv->state[i].port->type == PORT_UNKNOWN &&
> drv->state[i].count == 0)
> return &drv->state[i];
>
--
George Anzinger george@mvista.com
High-res-timers: http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/
Preemption patch: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: problem w/ kgdb serial port on 2.6.0 & 2.6.1
2004-01-20 9:41 ` George Anzinger
@ 2004-01-21 17:13 ` Terence Ripperda, tripperda
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Terence Ripperda, tripperda @ 2004-01-21 17:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: George Anzinger; +Cc: Terence Ripperda, Linux Kernel Mailing List
oh, this is with the kgdb from sourceforge. I had the problem with linux-2.6.1-kgdb-2.0.2.tar.bz2 (I'm pretty sure I also had the same problem with an earlier version of kgdb for 2.6.0).
I did catch a backtrace for this issue since my last email:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0xc02b44d2 in uart_match_port (port1=0x0, port2=0xc18f7e38) at drivers/serial/serial_core.c:2278
2278 if (port1->iotype != port2->iotype)
(gdb) bt
#0 0xc02b44d2 in uart_match_port (port1=0x0, port2=0xc18f7e38)
at drivers/serial/serial_core.c:2278
#1 0xc02b4559 in uart_find_match_or_unused (drv=0xc049cac0, port=0xc18f7e38)
at drivers/serial/serial_core.c:2307
#2 0xc02b462d in uart_register_port (drv=0xc049cac0, port=0xc18f7e38)
at drivers/serial/serial_core.c:2355
#3 0xc02b6895 in __register_serial (req=0xc18f7ef4, line=0xffffffff)
at drivers/serial/8250.c:2068
#4 0xc02b68aa in register_serial (req=0xc18f7ef4) at drivers/serial/8250.c:2086
#5 0xc02b7778 in serial_pnp_probe (dev=0xc1919400, dev_id=<incomplete type>)
at drivers/serial/8250_pnp.c:411
#6 0xc02967ad in pnp_device_probe (dev=<incomplete type>) at drivers/pnp/driver.c:119
#7 0xc02bc1ba in bus_match (dev=0xc1919400, drv=<incomplete type>) at drivers/base/bus.c:269
#8 0xc02bc2a0 in driver_attach (drv=<incomplete type>) at drivers/base/bus.c:342
#9 0xc02bc51d in bus_add_driver (drv=<incomplete type>) at drivers/base/bus.c:459
#10 0xc02bc8ca in driver_register (drv=<incomplete type>) at drivers/base/driver.c:91
#11 0xc0296862 in pnp_register_driver (drv=<incomplete type>) at drivers/pnp/driver.c:175
#12 0xc05036f1 in serial8250_pnp_init () at drivers/serial/8250_pnp.c:433
#13 0xc04f46c1 in do_initcalls () at init/main.c:500
#14 0xc18f6000 in ?? ()
Thanks,
Terence
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 01:41:08AM -0800, george@mvista.com wrote:
> Uh, which kgdb? The one from Andrew's mm tree or the one from souceforge?
>
> George
>
>
> tripperda@nvidia.com wrote:
> >when trying to use the newest kgdb patches against both 2.6.0 and 2.6.1, I
> >ran into a boot-time kernel oops in the serial port code. this would
> >happen shortly after connecting to a remote gdb, on a Dell M60 laptop.
> >
> >I don't have the actual oops message anymore, but I have a patch that
> >fixed things for me. not sure if the patch is correct, so here's the info:
> >
> >the oops happened in serial_core.c:uart_match_port(struct uart_port
> >*port1, struct uart_port *port2). the problem was that port1 was NULL,
> >causing an oops on this code (I've added printks in my file, so the line
> >numbers would be off):
> >
> >static int uart_match_port(struct uart_port *port1, struct uart_port
> >*port2)
> >{
> > if (port1->iotype != port2->iotype)
> > return 0;
> >
> >this was called from uart_find_match_or_unused(struct uart_driver *drv,
> >struct uart_port *port), here:
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < drv->nr; i++)
> > if (uart_match_port(drv->state[i].port, port))
> > return &drv->state[i];
> >
> >
> >I added printks to get a better idea of what's going on and see this:
> >
> >Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_register_driver (will alloc state)
> >Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 1
> >Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 3
> >Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 4
> >Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 5
> >Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 6
> >Jan 14 23:58:09 localhost kernel: uart_add_one_port: line 7
> >
> >are the ports added supposed to be sequential? it looks like
> >drv->state[i].port is filled in as needed, but uart_find_match_or_unused()
> >seems to expect all drv->state[i] for i = 0 && i < drv->nr.
> >
> >I "fixed" this in my kernel by adding checks for drv->state[i].port being
> >non-null before trying to use it, and everything works great (patch
> >attached). but I'm not sure if that's the correct solution, or if the
> >ports should be added sequentially instead of as they are. I'm more than
> >happy to run more tests and get more information.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Terence
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >--- serial_core.c 2004-01-16 14:20:15.000000000 -0600
> >+++ serial_core.c.new 2004-01-16 14:19:43.000000000 -0600
> >@@ -2304,7 +2304,7 @@
> > * then we can't register the port.
> > */
> > for (i = 0; i < drv->nr; i++)
> >- if (uart_match_port(drv->state[i].port, port))
> >+ if (drv->state[i].port &&
> >uart_match_port(drv->state[i].port, port))
> > return &drv->state[i];
> >
> > /*
> >@@ -2313,7 +2313,8 @@
> > * used (indicated by zero iobase).
> > */
> > for (i = 0; i < drv->nr; i++)
> >- if (drv->state[i].port->type == PORT_UNKNOWN &&
> >+ if (drv->state[i].port &&
> >+ drv->state[i].port->type == PORT_UNKNOWN &&
> > drv->state[i].port->iobase == 0 &&
> > drv->state[i].count == 0)
> > return &drv->state[i];
> >@@ -2323,7 +2324,8 @@
> > * entry which doesn't have a real port associated with it.
> > */
> > for (i = 0; i < drv->nr; i++)
> >- if (drv->state[i].port->type == PORT_UNKNOWN &&
> >+ if (drv->state[i].port &&
> >+ drv->state[i].port->type == PORT_UNKNOWN &&
> > drv->state[i].count == 0)
> > return &drv->state[i];
> >
>
> --
> George Anzinger george@mvista.com
> High-res-timers: http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/
> Preemption patch: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-01-21 17:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-01-16 20:32 problem w/ kgdb serial port on 2.6.0 & 2.6.1 Terence Ripperda, tripperda
2004-01-20 9:41 ` George Anzinger
2004-01-21 17:13 ` Terence Ripperda, tripperda
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox