linux-ext4 - Re: Call trace in ext4_es_lru

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]

Message-ID: <54807880.40203@profihost.ag>
Date:	Thu, 04 Dec 2014 16:06:40 +0100
From:	Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG <s.priebe@...fihost.ag>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
CC:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	"p.herz@...fihost.ag >> Philipp Herz - Profihost AG" 
	<p.herz@...fihost.ag>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@...bao.com>
Subject: Re: Call trace in ext4_es_lru_add on 3.10 stable


Am 26.11.2014 um 21:26 schrieb Jan Kara:
> On Wed 26-11-14 16:11:37, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
>> Am 26.11.2014 um 09:25 schrieb Jan Kara:
>>>   Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed 26-11-14 09:06:43, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
>>>> i'm still getting a lot of those call traces:
>>>> "
>>>> Call Trace:
>>>>  [<ffffffffa01d7006>] ext4_es_lru_add+0x26/0x80 [ext4]
>>>>  [<ffffffffa01d7286>] ext4_es_insert_extent+0x96/0x100 [ext4]
>>>>  [<ffffffffa01c3fd3>] ? ext4_find_delalloc_range+0x23/0x60 [ext4]
>>>>  [<ffffffffa019b781>] ext4_map_blocks+0x111/0x450 [ext4]
>>>>  [<ffffffffa019d167>] _ext4_get_block+0x87/0x190 [ext4]
>>>>  [<ffffffffa019d2c6>] ext4_get_block+0x16/0x20 [ext4]
>>>>  [<ffffffff8117f73f>] generic_block_bmap+0x3f/0x50
>>>>  [<ffffffffa013f4ae>] ? jbd2_journal_file_buffer+0x4e/0x80 [jbd2]
>>>>  [<ffffffff810f6242>] ? mapping_tagged+0x12/0x20
>>>>  [<ffffffffa019ad71>] ext4_bmap+0x91/0xf0 [ext4]
>>>>  [<ffffffff811686de>] bmap+0x1e/0x30
>>>>  [<ffffffffa0148063>] jbd2_journal_bmap+0x33/0xb0 [jbd2]
>>>>  [<ffffffffa014831d>] jbd2_journal_next_log_block+0x7d/0x90 [jbd2]
>>>>  [<ffffffffa0140238>] jbd2_journal_commit_transaction+0x7f8/0x1ae0 [jbd2]
>>>>  [<ffffffff81084e13>] ? idle_balance+0xd3/0x110
>>>>  [<ffffffff8105a018>] ? lock_timer_base.isra.35+0x38/0x70
>>>>  [<ffffffffa014593a>] kjournald2+0xba/0x230 [jbd2]
>>>>  [<ffffffff81070360>] ? finish_wait+0x80/0x80
>>>>  [<ffffffffa0145880>] ? jbd2_journal_release_jbd_inode+0x130/0x130 [jbd2]
>>>>  [<ffffffff8106fb60>] kthread+0xc0/0xd0
>>>>  [<ffffffff8106faa0>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x130/0x130
>>>>  [<ffffffff81554c2c>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
>>>>  [<ffffffff8106faa0>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x130/0x130
>>>> "
>>>>
>>>> Is there any chance to fix them in vanilla 3.10.61?
>>>   Ted is just testing patches to fix these. You are welcome if you can give
>>> them a try as well (tarball attached). I'm not sure patches will be
>>> backported as far as to 3.10-stable but when the patches get some testing
>>> in mainline, I'll be porting them to 3.12-stable for our enterprise
>>> kernel...
>>
>> OK i tried to port them to 3.10 but it seems i can't handle this. There
>> are so many differences. Are there any workarounds possible? Currently
>> the 3.10 kernel is also completely crashing with this backtrace.
>   No workarounds I'm aware of. Sorry. When I have patches for 3.12, you can
> try porting them to 3.10. That should be an easier task...
> 
> 								Honza

those patches work absolutely fine on a 3.16 kernel. Do you have any
idea, when your 3.12 backport is done?


Thanks!

Greets,
Stefan Priebe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html