linux-kernel - 2.6.25-rc8-mm1 - BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/0/0xffffffff

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: <4487.1207549282@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date:	Mon, 07 Apr 2008 02:21:22 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, mingo@...hat.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: 2.6.25-rc8-mm1 - BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/0/0xffffffff

On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 21:32:14 PDT, Andrew Morton said:
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.25-rc8/2.6.25-rc8-mm1/

Been seeing these crop up once in a while - can take hours after a reboot
before I see the first one, but once I see one, I'm likely to see more, at
a frequency of anywhere from ~5seconds to ~10 minutes between BUG msgs.

BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/0/0xffffffff
Pid: 0, comm: swapper Tainted: P          2.6.25-rc8-mm1 #4

Call Trace:
 [<ffffffff8020b2f4>] ? default_idle+0x0/0x74
 [<ffffffff8022be19>] __schedule_bug+0x5d/0x61
 [<ffffffff80552aea>] schedule+0x11a/0x9e4
 [<ffffffff805536ce>] ? preempt_schedule+0x3c/0xaa
 [<ffffffff802480f1>] ? hrtimer_forward+0x82/0x96
 [<ffffffff804600a4>] ? cpuidle_idle_call+0x0/0xd5
 [<ffffffff8020b2f4>] ? default_idle+0x0/0x74
 [<ffffffff8020b2e0>] cpu_idle+0xf6/0x10a
 [<ffffffff80540cb2>] rest_init+0x86/0x8a

Eventually, I end up with a basically hung system, and need to alt-sysrq-B.

Yes, I know it's tainted, and it's possible the root cause is a self-inflicted
buggy module - but the traceback above seems odd.  Did some of my code manage
to idle the CPU while is_atomic was set, or is the path from cpu_idle on down
doing something it shouldn't be?

(I admit being confused - if my code was the source of the is_atomic error,
shouldn't it have been caught on the *previous* call to schedule - the one
that ran through all the queues and decided we should invoke idle?

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped