linux-kernel - BUG: spinlock lockup

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJ8eaTzT4Os5RjtTu5gWpA=t-8Gg9rwmthEHVUOf+3+XhRpu6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 18 Jan 2014 12:55:51 +0530
From:	naveen yadav <yad.naveen@...il.com>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, will.deacon@....com
Subject: BUG: spinlock lockup

Dear All,

We are using 3.8.x  kernel on ARM, We are facing soft lockup issue.
Following are the logs.

BUG: spinlock lockup suspected on CPU#0, process1/525
lock: 0xd8ac9a64, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: <none>/-1, .owner_cpu: -1

1 . Looks like lock is available as owner is -1, why arch_spin_trylock
is getting failed ?

2. There is a patch : ARM: spinlock: retry trylock operation if strex
fails on free lock
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/240913
In this patch, A loop has been added around strexeq %2, %0, [%3]".
{Comment "retry the trylock operation if the lock appears
to be free but the strex reported failure"}

but arch_spin_trylock is called by __spin_lock_debug and its already
getting called in loops. So what purpose is resolves?

static void __spin_lock_debug(raw_spinlock_t *lock)
{
        u64 i;
        u64 loops = loops_per_jiffy * HZ;

        for (i = 0; i < loops; i++) {
                if (arch_spin_trylock(&lock->raw_lock))
                        return;
                __delay(1);
        }
        /* lockup suspected: */
        spin_dump(lock, "lockup suspected");
}

3. Is this patch useful to us, How can we reproduce this scenario ?
Scenario : Lock is available but arch_spin_trylock  is returning as failure

Thanks
--
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/