| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 10:07:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: ftrace 2.6.30-rc4: possible circular locking dependency
Hi Tetsuo,
Thanks for the report. But we already have a fix for it. But the change is
a bit of design change, and it is one of those things that is hard to know
if we should push it up stream this late in the RCs.
We probably should. But the change affects two different subsystems. It
affects ftrace as well as the module code. There's a bit of changes to the
module code (Rusty being the maintainer) where we would be more
comfortable if it goes via Rusty.
Rusty and Ingo,
What is the best way to get this change upstream?
Reference: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/4/15/548
tip git SHA1: 93eb677d74a4f7d3edfb678c94f6c0544d9fbad2
-- Steve
On Fri, 8 May 2009, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I got this.
>
> [ 7.153662] Write protecting the kernel read-only data: 2172k
> [ 7.155593] Testing CPA: undo c0718000-c0937000
> [ 7.156809] Testing CPA: write protecting again
> [ 7.677561]
> [ 7.677570] =======================================================
> [ 7.678536] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> [ 7.678536] 2.6.30-rc4 #1
> [ 7.678536] -------------------------------------------------------
> [ 7.678536] insmod/571 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 7.678536] (ftrace_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<c048e862>] ftrace_convert_nops+0x1f/0x1dc
> [ 7.678536]
> [ 7.678536] but task is already holding lock:
> [ 7.678536] (module_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<c0472637>] sys_init_module+0x3a/0x1ff
> [ 7.678536]
> [ 7.678536] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> [ 7.678536]
> [ 7.678536]
> [ 7.678536] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [ 7.678536]
> [ 7.678536] -> #1 (module_mutex){+.+.+.}:
> [ 7.678536] [<c046762e>] __lock_acquire+0x931/0xad4
> [ 7.678536] [<c0467861>] lock_acquire+0x90/0xad
> [ 7.678536] [<c0710d46>] __mutex_lock_common+0x3a/0x4b6
> [ 7.678536] [<c0711269>] mutex_lock_nested+0x33/0x3b
> [ 7.678536] [<c0470709>] module_update_tracepoints+0x15/0x6d
> [ 7.678536] [<c048bd7c>] tracepoint_update_probes+0x1c/0x1e
> [ 7.678536] [<c048c186>] tracepoint_probe_register+0x50/0x5f
> [ 7.678536] [<c048e6f1>] register_ftrace_graph+0x1ec/0x245
> [ 7.678536] [<c0493763>] trace_selftest_startup_function_graph+0x23/0x9d
> [ 7.678536] [<c0493e38>] register_tracer+0xf7/0x1fe
> [ 7.678536] [<c0abb66d>] init_graph_trace+0xd/0xf
> [ 7.678536] [<c040116a>] do_one_initcall+0x78/0x1d5
> [ 7.678536] [<c0aa26de>] kernel_init+0x13b/0x1a9
> [ 7.678536] [<c0403f9b>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10
> [ 7.678536] [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
> [ 7.678536]
> [ 7.678536] -> #0 (ftrace_lock){+.+.+.}:
> [ 7.678536] [<c0467540>] __lock_acquire+0x843/0xad4
> [ 7.678536] [<c0467861>] lock_acquire+0x90/0xad
> [ 7.678536] [<c0710d46>] __mutex_lock_common+0x3a/0x4b6
> [ 7.678536] [<c0711269>] mutex_lock_nested+0x33/0x3b
> [ 7.678536] [<c048e862>] ftrace_convert_nops+0x1f/0x1dc
> [ 7.678536] [<c048ea34>] ftrace_init_module+0x15/0x17
> [ 7.678536] [<c0471cbc>] load_module+0x1122/0x17c1
> [ 7.678536] [<c0472661>] sys_init_module+0x64/0x1ff
> [ 7.678536] [<c0403575>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
> [ 7.678536] [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
> [ 7.678536]
> [ 7.678536] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 7.678536]
> [ 7.678536] 1 lock held by insmod/571:
> [ 7.678536] #0: (module_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<c0472637>] sys_init_module+0x3a/0x1ff
> [ 7.678536]
> [ 7.678536] stack backtrace:
> [ 7.678536] Pid: 571, comm: insmod Not tainted 2.6.30-rc4 #1
> [ 7.678536] Call Trace:
> [ 7.678536] [<c0465d39>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x5d/0x68
> [ 7.678536] [<c0467540>] __lock_acquire+0x843/0xad4
> [ 7.678536] [<c0467861>] lock_acquire+0x90/0xad
> [ 7.678536] [<c048e862>] ? ftrace_convert_nops+0x1f/0x1dc
> [ 7.678536] [<c0710d46>] __mutex_lock_common+0x3a/0x4b6
> [ 7.678536] [<c048e862>] ? ftrace_convert_nops+0x1f/0x1dc
> [ 7.678536] [<c0403fc7>] ? ftrace_call+0x5/0x8
> [ 7.678536] [<c0711269>] mutex_lock_nested+0x33/0x3b
> [ 7.678536] [<c048e862>] ? ftrace_convert_nops+0x1f/0x1dc
> [ 7.678536] [<c048e862>] ftrace_convert_nops+0x1f/0x1dc
> [ 7.678536] [<c048ea34>] ftrace_init_module+0x15/0x17
> [ 7.678536] [<c0471cbc>] load_module+0x1122/0x17c1
> [ 7.678536] [<c0464125>] ? debug_mutex_free_waiter+0x25/0x81
> [ 7.678536] [<c0472661>] sys_init_module+0x64/0x1ff
> [ 7.678536] [<c0403575>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
> [ 7.807546] insmod used greatest stack depth: 2328 bytes left
> [ 7.912357] Fusion MPT base driver 3.04.07
>
> Environment is CentOS 5.3(i686) on VMware.
> Config is at http://I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp/tmp/config-2.6.30-rc4
> Full message is at http://I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp/tmp/dmesg-2.6.30-rc4.txt
>
> Regards.
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists