linux-kernel - Re: Strange soft lockup detected message (looks like spin

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20070504174456.GC8753@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Date:	Fri, 4 May 2007 13:44:56 -0400
From:	lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen)
To:	Frederik Deweerdt <deweerdt@...e.fr>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Strange soft lockup detected message (looks like spin_lock bug in pcnet32)

On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 11:40:09AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 05:34:38PM +0200, Frederik Deweerdt wrote:
> > For the "what" part, see Documentation/lockdep-design.txt. You'll enable
> > it by with SPINLOCK_DEBUG, indeed.
> 
> Well I hope to see it hit the BUG again soon then to see what it has to
> say.

Well I didn't see anything for a while with SPINLOCK_DEBUG enabled
(maybe I didn't wait long enough).  So I tried changing it to
spin_lock_irqsave, and that didn't go well.  I got this as the result
now:

onfiguring network interfaces...eth1: link up, 100Mbps, full-duplex
BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, ifconfig/962
 lock: cf7a3304, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: ifconfig/962, .owner_cpu: 0
 [<c0104024>] dump_stack+0x24/0x30
 [<c01e3947>] _raw_spin_lock+0x137/0x140
 [<c02981ec>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x1c/0x30
 [<d084eb86>] pcnet32_interrupt+0x216/0x290 [pcnet32]
 [<c013b95d>] handle_IRQ_event+0x3d/0x70
 [<c013ba2c>] __do_IRQ+0x9c/0x120
 [<c0105025>] do_IRQ+0x25/0x60
 [<c010316a>] common_interrupt+0x1a/0x20
 [<c011927a>] __do_softirq+0x3a/0xa0
 [<c011930d>] do_softirq+0x2d/0x30
 [<c0119557>] irq_exit+0x37/0x40
 [<c010502a>] do_IRQ+0x2a/0x60
 [<c010316a>] common_interrupt+0x1a/0x20
 [<c02983c0>] _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x10/0x40
 [<d08517ea>] pcnet32_open+0x27a/0x390 [pcnet32]
 [<c02343e9>] dev_open+0x39/0x80
 [<c0232b5a>] dev_change_flags+0xfa/0x130
 [<c0277b7f>] devinet_ioctl+0x4ff/0x6f0
 [<c0227b24>] sock_ioctl+0xf4/0x1f0
 [<c017027c>] do_ioctl+0x2c/0x80
 [<c0170322>] vfs_ioctl+0x52/0x2f0
 [<c017062f>] sys_ioctl+0x6f/0x80
 [<c0102f27>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
 [<b7eebd04>] 0xb7eebd04
BUG: spinlock lockup on CPU#0, ifconfig/962, cf7a3304
 [<c0104024>] dump_stack+0x24/0x30
 [<c01e391f>] _raw_spin_lock+0x10f/0x140
 [<c02981ec>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x1c/0x30
 [<d084eb86>] pcnet32_interrupt+0x216/0x290 [pcnet32]
 [<c013b95d>] handle_IRQ_event+0x3d/0x70
 [<c013ba2c>] __do_IRQ+0x9c/0x120
 [<c0105025>] do_IRQ+0x25/0x60
 [<c010316a>] common_interrupt+0x1a/0x20
 [<c011927a>] __do_softirq+0x3a/0xa0
 [<c011930d>] do_softirq+0x2d/0x30
 [<c0119557>] irq_exit+0x37/0x40
 [<c010502a>] do_IRQ+0x2a/0x60
 [<c010316a>] common_interrupt+0x1a/0x20
 [<c02983c0>] _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x10/0x40
 [<d08517ea>] pcnet32_open+0x27a/0x390 [pcnet32]
 [<c02343e9>] dev_open+0x39/0x80
 [<c0232b5a>] dev_change_flags+0xfa/0x130
 [<c0277b7f>] devinet_ioctl+0x4ff/0x6f0
 [<c0227b24>] sock_ioctl+0xf4/0x1f0
 [<c017027c>] do_ioctl+0x2c/0x80
 [<c0170322>] vfs_ioctl+0x52/0x2f0
 [<c017062f>] sys_ioctl+0x6f/0x80
 [<c0102f27>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
 [<b7eebd04>] 0xb7eebd04

Obviously that wasn't so good.

--
Len Sorensen
-
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/