linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.18-rc5-mm1 + all hotfixes -- BUG: MAX_STACK_TRACE

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: <a44ae5cd0609031005u263aebebr6e53fb59e0153d0a@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 3 Sep 2006 10:05:54 -0700
From:	"Miles Lane" <miles.lane@...il.com>
To:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...l.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.18-rc5-mm1 + all hotfixes -- BUG: MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES too low!

On 9/3/06, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> * Miles Lane <miles.lane@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > Sorry Andrew.  I don't see clues here to help me target the report to
> > a maintainer. I hope this helps.
> >
> > BUG: MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES too low!
> > turning off the locking correctness validator.
>
> Miles, could you try the patch below? (Andrew: if this solves Miles'
> problem then i think this is v2.6.18 material too. [The other
> possibility would be some permanent stack-trace entries leak, in which
> case the patch will not help. If that happens then we'll have to debug
> this some more.])
>
>         Ingo
>
> ---------------->
> From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> Subject: lockdep: double the number of stack-trace entries
>
> Miles Lane reported the "BUG: MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES too low!" message,
> which means that during normal use his system produced enough lockdep
> events so that the 128-thousand entries stack-trace array got exhausted.
> Double the size of the array.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> ---
>  kernel/lockdep_internals.h |    2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Index: linux/kernel/lockdep_internals.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/kernel/lockdep_internals.h
> +++ linux/kernel/lockdep_internals.h
> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
>   * Stack-trace: tightly packed array of stack backtrace
>   * addresses. Protected by the hash_lock.
>   */
> -#define MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES        131072UL
> +#define MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES        262144UL
>
>  extern struct list_head all_lock_classes;
>
>

Ingo, there seemed to be a difference between the file you editted and
 the one in Andrew's tree.  I remade you patch so it applies cleanly.
I'll test and let you know.  One word of caution, I only hit the
problem once and I'm not sure how to trigger the condition.  I'll do
my best.

Thanks,
        Miles

--- kernel/lockdep_internals.h~ 2006-09-03 09:59:29.000000000 -0700
+++ kernel/lockdep_internals.h  2006-09-03 10:00:55.000000000 -0700
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
  * Stack-trace: tightly packed array of stack backtrace
  * addresses. Protected by the hash_lock.
  */
-#define MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES        131072UL
+#define MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES        262144UL

 extern struct list_head all_lock_classes;

-- 
VGER BF report: H 0.0351707
-
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/