linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tty: avoid recursive BTM in pty

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:	Mon, 28 Jun 2010 10:17:39 -0700
From:	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: avoid recursive BTM in pty_close

On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>> Call Trace:
>>  [<a0000001000159d0>] show_stack+0x50/0xa0
>>  [<a00000010090f270>] dump_stack+0x30/0x50
>>  [<a00000010008e2c0>] warn_slowpath_common+0xc0/0x120
>>  [<a00000010008e360>] warn_slowpath_null+0x40/0x60
>>  [<a00000010053eb40>] tty_open+0x160/0xc60
>>  [<a0000001001af9b0>] chrdev_open+0x310/0x360
>>  [<a0000001001a58b0>] __dentry_open+0x350/0x680
>>  [<a0000001001a5d80>] nameidata_to_filp+0x80/0xc0
>>  [<a0000001001bfee0>] finish_open+0x160/0x380
>>  [<a0000001001c0cc0>] do_last+0xbc0/0xce0
>>  [<a0000001001c5270>] do_filp_open+0x2f0/0xb40
>>  [<a0000001001a5290>] do_sys_open+0x90/0x200
>>  [<a0000001001a54d0>] sys_open+0x50/0x80
>>  [<a000000100b907e0>] kernel_init+0x340/0x420
>>  [<a000000100013c10>] kernel_thread_helper+0x30/0x60
>>  [<a00000010000a0c0>] start_kernel_thread+0x20/0x40
>
> Ok, this is the same one you reported at first. I forgot to
> mention that the other patch I sent as a reply to your report
> is still needed and not yet in -next since I'm trying to
> sort through the other BKL removal patches now.
> This instance of the WARN_ON is completely harmless though,
> you could consider this one a false positive.

Quick status check. I'm still seeing these messages in next-20100628.
Are you still working on a fix?

-Tony
--
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/