From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750915AbVJIQ2h (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Oct 2005 12:28:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750926AbVJIQ2h (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Oct 2005 12:28:37 -0400 Received: from smtp-100-sunday.noc.nerim.net ([62.4.17.100]:26888 "EHLO mallaury.nerim.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750914AbVJIQ2g (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Oct 2005 12:28:36 -0400 Message-ID: <4349614F.1010408@frankengul.org> Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 20:28:31 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9bastien_Bernard?= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051002) X-Accept-Language: fr, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org, netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Sparc64 U60: no iptables References: <4347A731.7010509@frankengul.org> <4348EFF4.3040305@frankengul.org> In-Reply-To: <4348EFF4.3040305@frankengul.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sébastien Bernard a écrit : > Sébastien Bernard wrote: > >> Hi there. >> >> Being the owner of a two-way U60, I've been happy with it until >> 2.6.11.6. >> >> The machine is a 2x300Mhz Uii with 1536Mb of memory and 2 scsi >> internal disk. >> >> Since 2.6.12, I'm unfortunately unable to use it as gateway box, >> since the installation of iptables >> cause a OOPS in the ipt_mangle. >> >> I'm unable to send you the trace now because once it happened, it is >> not written on the files, only on the console. >> >> This oops happens from the 2.6.12.x to the 2.6.13.x - not tried the >> 2.6.14-rc. >> It is related to the iptables subsystem. >> It also happen with the official debian kernel (2.6.12-1-smp). >> >> I'll try this week-end to setup early 2.6.12-rcx to check when the >> problem occured. >> >> I will post the oops as soon as I write it down. >> How can I get the copy of the trace without handwriting ? >> What is the information relevant in the oops ? (register + stack >> trace ?) >> >> Seb >> >> > Ok, I reproduced the problem on the 2.6.12-rc1. > Here's the backtrace : > > Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference. > > nmbd: Ooops[#1] > > ip_do_table + 0x21c/0x380 > ip_do_table + 0x44/0x380 > ip_local_hook + 0x84/0x120 > nf_iterate + 0x64/0xc0 > nf_hook_slow + 0x4c/0x120 > ip_push_pending_frames + 0x2d8/0x4c0 > udp_push_pending_frames + 0x118/0x260 > udp_sendmsg + 0x398/0x6c0 > inet_sendmsg + 0x30/0x60 > sock_sendmsg + 0xc8/0x100 > I found the culprit for my oops. In the iptables, NR_CPUS is set to 4 to get the 2 cpus recognized properly. The culprit patch substitute the NR_CPUS by the num_possible_cpus() macro. With this patch applied, inserting the iptables modules gets you instant oops... With it reverted, everything works as normal. I suspect that NR_CPUS == 4 and num_possible_cpus() == 2. Can one explain me why this patch works on other archs, and oops on the sparc64 smp ? Can one explain why I'm the only one to have this problem ? Seb Here is the patch I reverted : --- a/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_tables.c 2005-03-17 17:35:05 -08:00 +++ b/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_tables.c 2005-03-17 17:35:05 -08:00 @@ -923,7 +923,7 @@ } /* And one copy for every other CPU */ - for (i = 1; i < NR_CPUS; i++) { + for (i = 1; i < num_possible_cpus(); i++) { memcpy(newinfo->entries + SMP_ALIGN(newinfo->size)*i, newinfo->entries, SMP_ALIGN(newinfo->size)); @@ -945,7 +945,7 @@ struct ipt_entry *table_base; unsigned int i; - for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) { + for (i = 0; i < num_possible_cpus(); i++) { table_base = (void *)newinfo->entries + TABLE_OFFSET(newinfo, i); @@ -992,7 +992,7 @@ unsigned int cpu; unsigned int i; - for (cpu = 0; cpu < NR_CPUS; cpu++) { + for (cpu = 0; cpu < num_possible_cpus(); cpu++) { i = 0; IPT_ENTRY_ITERATE(t->entries + TABLE_OFFSET(t, cpu), t->size, @@ -1130,7 +1130,7 @@ return -ENOMEM; newinfo = vmalloc(sizeof(struct ipt_table_info) - + SMP_ALIGN(tmp.size) * NR_CPUS); + + SMP_ALIGN(tmp.size) * num_possible_cpus()); if (!newinfo) return -ENOMEM; @@ -1460,7 +1460,7 @@ = { 0, 0, 0, { 0 }, { 0 }, { } }; newinfo = vmalloc(sizeof(struct ipt_table_info) - + SMP_ALIGN(repl->size) * NR_CPUS); + + SMP_ALIGN(repl->size) * num_possible_cpus()); if (!newinfo) return -ENOMEM; -------------------