linux-kernel - Re: BUG at net/sunrpc/svc

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: <50F63882.8000607@parallels.com>
Date:	Wed, 16 Jan 2013 09:20:02 +0400
From:	Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@...allels.com>
To:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Mark Lord <kernel@...savvy.com>
CC:	<linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: BUG at net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c:921

16.01.2013 00:56, J. Bruce Fields пишет:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:16:00PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
>> On 13-01-14 03:37 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>> Thanks for the report.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:17:09AM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
>>>> Since upgrading to 3.7, and now 3.7.2, my AMD-450E based server
>>>
>>> It's acting as an NFS client, right?
>>
>> Client and server, with other Linux boxes all running 3.something kernels.
>>
>>> What did you upgrade from?
>>
>> 3.4.something, I believe.
>>
>>>> is getting these BUG complaints.  The .config file is gzip'd/attached.
>>>
>>> Is this easy to reproduce?
>>
>> So far, it seems to pop up within a day or so of any reboot.
>> I normally only reboot that system for a kernel upgrade,
>> but can do so a bit more often if there's useful info to collect.
>
> So this means svc_delete_xprt was called on an xprt twice.
>
> That could happen if server threads are still running (and calling
> svc_recv) after we start shutting down the server: svc_shutdown_net
> assumes that server threads are already shut down, but that isn't true
> any more after the containerization work.
>
> I thought that would only be a bug for users actually running multiple
> containers, but looking at nfs_callback_down, I don't think that's
> true--it seems to always shut down the thread last.
>

Thanks, Bruce. It reminds me the patch with additional protection for permanents sockets shutdown I've sent you a couple of mount ago...
Look like I should revisit this patch at least.

Mark, could you provide any call traces?

> --b.
>


-- 
Best regards,
Stanislav Kinsbursky
--
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/