linux-kernel - Re: [Bug #17752] 2.6.36-rc3: inconsistent lock state (iprune_sem, shrink_icache

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: <4C97C7EC.5070907@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date:	Mon, 20 Sep 2010 22:45:32 +0200
From:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
CC:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
	Maciej Rutecki <maciej.rutecki@...il.com>,
	Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>
Subject: Re: [Bug #17752] 2.6.36-rc3: inconsistent lock state (iprune_sem,
 shrink_icache_memory)

Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> of recent regressions.
> 
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.35.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> know (either way).
> 
> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17752
> Subject		: 2.6.36-rc3: inconsistent lock state (iprune_sem, shrink_icache_memory)
> Submitter	: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
> Date		: 2010-09-01 6:37 (20 days old)
> Message-ID	: <tkrat.ed8eda6bc8ffe64e@...6.in-berlin.de>
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=128332308528119&w=2

I think this should not be marked as a regression.  See the older reports of
very similar issues (in my LKML mail from September 3, logged in bugzilla in
comment #1)
	http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/15/76	(2.6.33-rc, xfs involved)
	http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/18/108	(2.6.32.y, ntfs involved)
and hch's analysis in the first of these two threads
	http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/19/267	(several filesystems and
						 other code paths)
So, unless my trace was a code path that only newly acquired that oldproblem
of other code paths, this is an older issue.  Alas this is not obvious to me
at least from the log that I got.

I did not have lockdep enabled on the machine which delivered the log during
the last few months or so; I just remembered to re-enable it at the occasion
of switching to 2.6.36-rc.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==-=- =--= =-=--
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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/