Date:	Mon, 16 Jul 2007 20:49:03 +0530
From:	"Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@...il.com>
To:	"Gabriel C" <nix.or.die@...glemail.com>
Cc:	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Christoph Lameter" <clameter@....com>, htejun@...il.com,
	gregkh@...e.de
Subject: Re: Oops while modprobing phy fixed module

Hi Gabriel,

On 7/16/07, Gabriel C <nix.or.die@...glemail.com> wrote:

> ( http://194.231.229.228/Oops.txt )

> I cannot reproduce this on plain 2.6.22 so I've started to bisect the
> problem.

Could you reproduce this oops at will at the "bad" points? [ Note that
git-bisect isn't quite applicable to bugs that are not 100% reproducible.
The ones that passed as "good" may have passed only because the
bug didn't get triggered on that particular test. Also, a perfectly good
commit could get unnecessarily marked "bad" because the bug
happened to get triggered for it ... so it's not quite trust-worthy for
your case. ]

> Here the bisect result:
>
> 3007e997de91ec59af39a3f9c91595b31ae6e08b is first bad commit
> commit 3007e997de91ec59af39a3f9c91595b31ae6e08b
> Author: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
> Date:   Thu Jun 14 04:27:23 2007 +0900
>
>     sysfs: use sysfs_mutex to protect the sysfs_dirent tree
>
>     As kobj sysfs dentries and inodes are gonna be made reclaimable,
>     i_mutex can't be used to protect sysfs_dirent tree.  Use sysfs_mutex
>     globally instead.  As the whole tree is protected with sysfs_mutex,
>     there is no reason to keep sysfs_rename_sem.  Drop it.
>
>     While at it, add docbook comments to functions which require
>     sysfs_mutex locking.
>
>     Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
>     Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
>
> :040000 040000 9deba7887752bc343cc4f5dea2dac70e895ea8b6
> 75340b6e18c1ada500bb1a2b99ee88fd93ebae8c M      fs

Hmm, I don't see why this one could introduce an oops in SLUB,
but it's doing some locking-related stuff, and if it didn't get it right,
the resulting races /could/ lead to some oops. But ... a recently
posted patch (http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/7/16/204) from Akinobu
Mita does point to an oops that was introduced by commit
0c096b507f15397da890051ee73de4266d3941fb that belongs to the
same patchset -- kmem_cache_free(NULL) is illegal and so will oops.
A curious coincidence is that you do see sysfs_new_dirent() in the
stack trace there, but the oops there is in kmem_cache_free(), not
kmem_cache_zalloc() as your dmesg output indicated.

Try that patch anyway, but I don't think that'll solve your problem --
if it was, you would've been seeing "unable to handle kernel NULL
pointer dereference" but what you've been posting is "unable to
handle kernel paging request at virtual address <non_null_ptr>" ...

Gaah.

And the worst thing about it all is that we're not able to trigger the
oops with debugging options -- that backtrace is horrible, so I'd
suggest CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER, at the very least. And also
perhaps DEBUG_INFO while we're at it -- that'll make later
analysis easier, if nothing else.

[ BTW I couldn't even get my compiler to generate the same
"Code:" as we saw in your dmesg (I suspect all the oopsen
have occurred with DEBUG=n, yes?) so my earlier analysis
that suspected SLUB's page->lockless_freelist in slab_alloc()
as the source of that invalid kernel address was actually
based on some human-work rather than simple tools doing
their thing. Gaah, again! ]

I'm thoroughly mystified ... Christoph? Tejun? Someone?

Satyam
-
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists