linux-kernel - Re: kernel BUG at drivers/block/ub.c:820!

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]

Date:	Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:02:58 +0200
From:	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
To:	Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, k-ueda@...jp.nec.com,
	j-nomura@...jp.nec.com, jens.axboe@...cle.com, zaitcev@...hat.com
Subject: Re: kernel BUG at drivers/block/ub.c:820!

On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 17:15 +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> OK So first this confirms that for ages the ub.c driver was leaking
> BIO's
> on first connection. Just that it was never noticed before.
> 
> or that we have a BLOCK_PC at hand but before the 7d699baf patch
> we completed with - rq->hard_nr_sectors << 9 - where now
> blk_rq_bytes(rq)
> will return 218 which is less. Could you also put rq->hard_nr_sectors
> in the print above?
> 
> Did you mange to find what is that 218 bytes command. Put a WARN_ON(1)
> in ub_request_fn_1 for any command that has a blk_rq_bytes(rq) of 218
> so we'll see who issues these commands. And what is the real bug.

I've added a WARN_ON(blk_rq_bytes(rq) == 218) right before the
ub_submit_scsi in ub_request_fn_1. ub_end_rq still reports the odd size
but I get nothing from ub_request_fn_1. Interesting.

-- 
blue skies,
  Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.


--
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/