linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for July 18: warning at kernel/lockdep.c:2068 trace_hardirqs_on

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: <19f34abd0807190255x304173d4wf2bfabb2d5bce511@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 19 Jul 2008 11:55:14 +0200
From:	"Vegard Nossum" <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To:	"Mariusz Kozlowski" <m.kozlowski@...land.pl>
Cc:	"Stephen Rothwell" <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Pekka Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for July 18: warning at kernel/lockdep.c:2068 trace_hardirqs_on_caller

On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Mariusz Kozlowski
<m.kozlowski@...land.pl> wrote:
> Hello,
>
>        I get this on my x86_32 laptop.
>
> ------------[ cut here ]------------
> WARNING: at /home/mako/linux/lkt/sources/linux-next/kernel/lockdep.c:2068 trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0xdc/0x128()
> Modules linked in:
> Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.26-next-20080718 #1
>  [<c011d5ca>] warn_on_slowpath+0x4e/0x68
>  [<c0132600>] ? init_srcu_struct+0x17/0x3b
>  [<c011de86>] ? release_console_sem+0x1c2/0x1e8
>  [<c0139818>] ? trace_hardirqs_off+0xb/0xd
>  [<c02b95cb>] ? _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x39/0x60
>  [<c011de9a>] ? release_console_sem+0x1d6/0x1e8
>  [<c01326be>] ? up+0x23/0x30
>  [<c011de86>] ? release_console_sem+0x1c2/0x1e8
>  [<c01326be>] ? up+0x23/0x30
>  [<c011de86>] ? release_console_sem+0x1c2/0x1e8
>  [<c013b83b>] ? __lock_acquire+0x365/0x1151
>  [<c013b048>] trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0xdc/0x128
>  [<c013b09f>] trace_hardirqs_on+0xb/0xd
>  [<c016a40b>] __slab_alloc+0x329/0x61e
>  [<c011665f>] ? kmemcheck_memset+0x24/0xe5
>  [<c016a7a0>] kmem_cache_alloc+0xa0/0xb6
>  [<c01dedb4>] ? kobject_init+0x3b/0xdd
>  [<c01dedb4>] ? kobject_init+0x3b/0xdd
>  [<c01dedb4>] kobject_init+0x3b/0xdd
>  [<c025997f>] firmware_map_add_entry+0x2a/0x4b
>  [<c03b8e0c>] firmware_map_add_early+0x32/0x56
>  [<c03a3faf>] e820_reserve_resources+0x10a/0x14e
>  [<c03a1965>] setup_arch+0x375/0x540
>  [<c0136e81>] ? clockevents_register_notifier+0x28/0x2d
>  [<c011e477>] ? printk+0x1b/0x1d
>  [<c03a09df>] start_kernel+0x67/0x278
>  [<c03a0304>] i386_start_kernel+0x64/0x70
>  =======================
> ---[ end trace 4eaa2a86a8e2da22 ]---
>

What I don't get here is how SLUB can be used this early in the boot
process. Notice that this is still miles away from the

    SLUB: Genslabs=12, HWalign=128, Order=0-3, MinObjects=0, CPUs=1, Nodes=1

line, which comes much later. And that kobject_init() _is_ calling
kzalloc() via verify_dynamic_kobject_allocation(). Isn't this an
error?

(Unfortunately, my "git log" doesn't turn up any recent changes for
any of the affected code paths here.)


Vegard

-- 
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
	-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
--
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/