netdev - Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 23 Nov 2007 00:21:57 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.23 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()

On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 19:47:35 +0000 Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu> wrote:

> WARN during log message being output to ttyS0 and netconsole:
> 
> [2059664.615816] __iptables__: init4 IN=ppp0 OUT=ppp0 WARNING: at kernel/softirq.c:139 local_bh_enable()
> [2059664.620535]  [<80120364>] local_bh_enable+0x3c/0x97
> [2059664.620553]  [<802e3356>] __nf_ct_ext_destroy+0x35/0x5b
> [2059664.620569]  [<802dfbeb>] destroy_conntrack+0x5e/0xf6
> [2059664.620577]  [<802db821>] nf_conntrack_destroy+0x1f/0x3f
> [2059664.620585]  [<802c0c71>] __kfree_skb+0xb8/0xf6
> [2059664.620597]  [<802d00f0>] zap_completion_queue+0x3e/0x64
> [2059664.620606]  [<802d0583>] find_skb+0x14/0x6b
> [2059664.620612]  [<801167cc>] inc_nr_running+0x12/0x25
> [2059664.620622]  [<802d0fd8>] netpoll_send_udp+0x2d/0x251
> [2059664.620630]  [<80226135>] uart_console_write+0x2a/0x33
> [2059664.620645]  [<80241319>] write_msg+0x32/0x41
> [2059664.620657]  [<8011c205>] __call_console_drivers+0x61/0x6d
> [2059664.620669]  [<8011c3fc>] release_console_sem+0x164/0x1bf
> [2059664.620679]  [<8011c81f>] vprintk+0x27a/0x2ff
> [2059664.620692]  [<8013881e>] handle_IRQ_event+0x1a/0x3f
> [2059664.620702]  [<801203a5>] local_bh_enable+0x7d/0x97
> [2059664.620709]  [<8031ae6a>] fn_hash_lookup+0xb0/0xcd
> [2059664.620723]  [<8011c8bf>] printk+0x1b/0x1f
> [2059664.620731]  [<8032b372>] ipt_log_packet+0x71/0x15e
> [2059664.620747]  [<8032b4a0>] ipt_log_target+0x41/0x4a
> [2059664.620757]  [<802ea446>] ipt_limit_match+0x58/0x76
> [2059664.620766]  [<8032b45f>] ipt_log_target+0x0/0x4a
> [2059664.620774]  [<803288c5>] ipt_do_table+0x3e2/0x479
> [2059664.620785]  [<80331228>] xfrm_policy_put_afinfo+0xa/0x1e
> [2059664.620800]  [<80332219>] xfrm_lookup+0x15/0x69
> [2059664.620809]  [<802db7d0>] nf_iterate+0x38/0x6a
> [2059664.620822]  [<802dbb60>] nf_hook_slow+0x57/0xe0
> [2059664.620830]  [<802f1e7c>] ip_forward_finish+0x0/0x22
> [2059664.620841]  [<802f20d1>] ip_forward+0x233/0x2ae
> [2059664.620849]  [<802f1e7c>] ip_forward_finish+0x0/0x22
> [2059664.620859]  [<802f0e7a>] ip_rcv+0x46f/0x49c
> [2059664.620866]  [<802f04a8>] ip_rcv_finish+0x0/0x2ab
> [2059664.620876]  [<802f0a0b>] ip_rcv+0x0/0x49c
> [2059664.620884]  [<802c544a>] netif_receive_skb+0x326/0x3ae
> [2059664.620894]  [<802c6efe>] process_backlog+0x6d/0xd2
> [2059664.620903]  [<802c766e>] net_rx_action+0x86/0x193
> [2059664.620911]  [<80120001>] __do_softirq+0x40/0x85
> [2059664.620919]  [<8012006d>] do_softirq+0x27/0x2b
> [2059664.620925]  [<8012023d>] irq_exit+0x2d/0x37
> [2059664.620931]  [<801062d9>] do_IRQ+0x7a/0x8d
> [2059664.620943]  [<8010479b>] common_interrupt+0x23/0x28
> [2059664.620954]  [<80209f85>] acpi_processor_idle+0x235/0x3a0
> [2059664.620967]  [<80102344>] cpu_idle+0x43/0x6c
> [2059664.620973]  [<804aa99e>] start_kernel+0x210/0x215
> [2059664.620989]  [<804aa317>] unknown_bootoption+0x0/0x195
> [2059664.620998]  =======================
> [2059664.852188] SRC=66.249.93.147 DST=* LEN=40 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=53 ID=23868 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=80 DPT=55219 WINDOW=0 RES=0x00 RST URGP=0

If that trace is to be beieved we're doing nefilter stuff on packets which
were sent across netconsole.

This probably isn't anything the netfilter guys have thought about.  And
probably we don't want them to.  Is there some simple way in which we can
exempt netconsole from netfilter processing?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html