linux-kernel - Re: [2.6.25-rc5-mm1] BUG() at mnt_want

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: <20080311202212.9fe1e5c1.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:22:12 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Dave Hansen <haveblue@...ibm.com>
Cc:	penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [2.6.25-rc5-mm1] BUG() at mnt_want_write().

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:03:30 -0700 Dave Hansen <haveblue@...ibm.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 10:37 +0900, penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp
> ...
> > checking TSC synchronization [CPU#0 -> CPU#1]: passed.
> > Brought up 2 CPUs
> > khelper used greatest stack depth: 2684 bytes left
> > net_namespace: 320 bytes
> > NET: Registered protocol family 16
> > INFO: trying to register non-static key.
> > the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation.
> > turning off the locking correctness validator.
> > Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.25-rc5-mm1 #1
> >  [<c013dd91>] __lock_acquire+0x194/0x6a3
> >  [<c0167ded>] ? cache_free_debugcheck+0x1fd/0x219
> >  [<c0168938>] ? kfree+0xdb/0xe5
> >  [<c013e775>] lock_acquire+0x6a/0x87
> >  [<c01368e4>] ? down+0xc/0x2f
> >  [<c03492b1>] _spin_lock_irqsave+0x25/0x55
> >  [<c01368e4>] ? down+0xc/0x2f
> >  [<c01368e4>] down+0xc/0x2f
> >  [<c022caf3>] device_add+0x152/0x243
> >  [<c022cbf6>] device_register+0x12/0x15
> >  [<c022ce9b>] device_create+0x76/0x90
> >  [<c04a1861>] vtconsole_class_init+0x72/0xb9
> >  [<c048d8ae>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x88
> >  [<c048d784>] do_initcalls+0x59/0x134
> >  [<c014bcb1>] ? register_irq_proc+0xb1/0xca
> >  [<c01a0000>] ? proc_symlink+0x5/0x73
> >  [<c048d8ae>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x88
> >  [<c048d87b>] do_basic_setup+0x1c/0x1e
> >  [<c048d8fb>] kernel_init+0x4d/0x88
> >  [<c01045b7>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10
> >  =======================
> 
> What is that, btw?? ^^

gregstuff.  There are changes to vt.c in -mm but afacit they aren't related
to vtconsole_class_init().


static int __init vtconsole_class_init(void)
{
	int i;

	vtconsole_class = class_create(THIS_MODULE, "vtconsole");
	if (IS_ERR(vtconsole_class)) {
		printk(KERN_WARNING "Unable to create vt console class; "
		       "errno = %ld\n", PTR_ERR(vtconsole_class));
		vtconsole_class = NULL;
	}

	/* Add system drivers to sysfs */
	for (i = 0; i < MAX_NR_CON_DRIVER; i++) {
		struct con_driver *con = &registered_con_driver[i];

		if (con->con && !con->dev) {
			con->dev = device_create(vtconsole_class, NULL,
						 MKDEV(0, con->node),
						 "vtcon%i", con->node);

			if (IS_ERR(con->dev)) {
				printk(KERN_WARNING "Unable to create "
				       "device for %s; errno = %ld\n",
				       con->desc, PTR_ERR(con->dev));
				con->dev = NULL;
			} else {
				vtconsole_init_device(con);
			}
		}
	}

	return 0;
}
postcore_initcall(vtconsole_class_init);

These lockdep-internal things keep on popping up but they're always rather
inscrutable and bound up in internal implementation minutiae and few know
what they mean.  Could this be improved in any way?  Maybe some huge
what-can-i-do-to-fix-this comments in lockdep.c?
--
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/