linux-kernel - Re: dwarf2 stuck Re: lockdep warning in i2c_transfer() with dibx000 DVB

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610161443010.29022@twin.jikos.cz>
Date:	Mon, 16 Oct 2006 14:45:18 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...os.cz>
To:	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>
cc:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: dwarf2 stuck Re: lockdep warning in i2c_transfer() with dibx000
 DVB - input tree merge plans?

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Jan Beulich wrote:

> >> [<c0103b69>] dump_trace+0x65/0x1a2
> >> [<c0103cb6>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x10/0x20
> >> [<c0103f84>] show_trace+0xa/0xc
> >> [<c0103f99>] dump_stack+0x13/0x15
> >> [<c0132ea4>] __lock_acquire+0x7bd/0xa05
> >> [<c01333c1>] lock_acquire+0x5c/0x7b
> >> [<c034b683>] __mutex_lock_slowpath+0xab/0x1de
> >> [<f8902177>] i2c_transfer+0x23/0x40 [i2c_core]
> >> [<f88fa1bf>] dibx000_i2c_gated_tuner_xfer+0x166/0x185 [dibx000_common]
> >> [<f8902183>] i2c_transfer+0x2f/0x40 [i2c_core]
> >> [<f891f04b>] mt2060_readreg+0x4b/0x69 [mt2060]
> >> [<f891f45e>] mt2060_attach+0x40/0x1ea [mt2060]
> >> [<f895f468>] dibusb_dib3000mc_tuner_attach+0x126/0x16c 
> >> [dvb_usb_dibusb_common]
> >> [<d10ea000>] 0xd10ea000
> >> DWARF2 unwinder stuck at 0xd10ea000
> >Hmm, no assembly code or anything. Jan, do you have any ideas? This 
> >looks just like a simple callback that goes over a module boundary.
> No, except if this was compiled with gcc 4.0.x (or maybe earlier), in which
> case inspection of the unwind data might be needed to tell if it's one of the
> mis-generated cases that we saw earlier.

Hi,

(strippped CC list a bit)

Yes, it was compiled using gcc 4.0.2, specifically gcc (GCC) 4.0.2 
20051125 (Red Hat 4.0.2-8). I can easily reproduce this, what additional 
information do you need? Or should I just try with newer gcc?

-- 
Jiri Kosina
-
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/