linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] next-20081216 - WARNING: at kernel/smp.c:333 smp_call_function

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:	Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:27:16 +0100
From:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:	Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, mingo@...e.hu,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	mel@....ul.ie
Subject: Re: [BUG] next-20081216 - WARNING: at kernel/smp.c:333	smp_call_function_mask

On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 02:05:47AM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> > * Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> [2008-12-24 12:34:41]:
> > 
> >> --
> > 
> > After the applying the patch, the kernel panic's with the same backtrace. The
> > box is running Fedora 5 on it.
> > 
> 
> please try...
> Ingo, do we need to switch to use #idef and inline function instead?

I recall David Howells had a similar issue with the bootparamter patch set.
The workaround he used was to add a barrier(); call in the weak function
to avoid the inline.

[full context kept as I added David to to: list].
	Sam

> 
> YH
> 
> 
> [PATCH] sparseirq: add printk to workaround compiler optimizing
> 
> Impact: fix panic on null pointer with sparseirq
> 
> some compiler seems to inline the weak global function.
> try to workaround it
> 
> also remove duplicated arch_early_irq_init()
> already have one weak copy in init/main.c
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yinghai <yinghai@...nel.org>
> 
> ---
>  init/main.c         |    2 ++
>  kernel/irq/handle.c |    7 ++-----
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: linux-2.6/init/main.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/init/main.c
> +++ linux-2.6/init/main.c
> @@ -544,10 +544,12 @@ void __init __weak thread_info_cache_ini
>  
>  void __init __weak arch_early_irq_init(void)
>  {
> +	printk(KERN_DEBUG "calling __weak arch_early_irq_init\n");
>  }
>  
>  void __init __weak early_irq_init(void)
>  {
> +	printk(KERN_DEBUG "calling __weak early_irq_init\n");
>  	arch_early_irq_init();
>  }
>  
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/irq/handle.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/irq/handle.c
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/irq/handle.c
> @@ -56,10 +56,6 @@ void handle_bad_irq(unsigned int irq, st
>  int nr_irqs = NR_IRQS;
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(nr_irqs);
>  
> -void __init __attribute__((weak)) arch_early_irq_init(void)
> -{
> -}
> -
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ
>  static struct irq_desc irq_desc_init = {
>  	.irq	    = -1,
> @@ -90,8 +86,9 @@ void init_kstat_irqs(struct irq_desc *de
>  		desc->kstat_irqs = (unsigned int *)ptr;
>  }
>  
> -void __attribute__((weak)) arch_init_chip_data(struct irq_desc *desc, int cpu)
> +void __weak arch_init_chip_data(struct irq_desc *desc, int cpu)
>  {
> +	printk(KERN_DEBUG "calling __weak arch_init_chip_data\n");
>  }
>  
>  static void init_one_irq_desc(int irq, struct irq_desc *desc, int cpu)
> --
> 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/
--
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/