[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56D01331.5030401@suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:56:17 +0100
From: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>, lwn@....net,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request from pty_write [was:
Linux 4.4.2]
On 02/26/2016, 01:38 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz> wrote:
>>
>> Interestingly, RBP contains address inside try_to_wake_up --
>> ffffffff810a535a (dunno why) which is:
>> ffffffff810a5355: e8 66 a0 ff ff callq ffffffff8109f3c0
>> <ttwu_stat>
>> ffffffff810a535a: e9 9d fe ff ff jmpq ffffffff810a51fc
>> <try_to_wake_up+0x3c>
>>
>> ttwu_stat does in the begginning:
>> mov $0x16e80,%r14
>>
>> which is what we actually still have in r14 when it crashes. The first
>> ttwu_stat's "if" has to go through the true branch (otherwise r14 would
>> be overwritten).
>
> Hmm. That does sound very much like it might be ttwu_stat() that has
> gotten the stack frame wrong, and when finishes exits, it does
>
> popq %rbp
> ret
>
> but in fact it popped the return address, and then returned to a crazy address.
>
> Which sounds like a corrupted stack pointer (not a corrupted stack).
>
> Can you make just the "vmlinux" file available somewhere?
Sure, both vmlinux w/ its separated .debuginfo sections vmlinux.debug
are at:
http://labs.suse.cz/jslaby/bug-968218/
There is also core.s which is a result of:
objdump -d vmlinux-4.4.2-3-default | grep -A 10000 '<update_rq_clock>:'
>core.s
> In my own private configuration, ttwu_stat() doesn't actually touch
> the stack at all - no stack pointer action anywhere except for the
>
> ttwu_stat:
> 1: call __fentry__
> pushq %rbp
> ..
> movq %rsp, %rbp #,
>
> .....
>
> popq %rbp
> ret
>
> but yeah, as Peter says, maybe an exception screwed up %rsp somehow..
Lucky you. My ttwu_stat does a bit more stack save-restoring. But all
seem to be paired:
ffffffff8109f3c0 <ttwu_stat>:
ffffffff8109f3c0: e8 fb ca 60 00 callq ffffffff816abec0
<__fentry__>
ffffffff8109f3c5: 55 push %rbp
ffffffff8109f3c6: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
ffffffff8109f3c9: 41 57 push %r15
ffffffff8109f3cb: 41 56 push %r14
ffffffff8109f3cd: 41 55 push %r13
ffffffff8109f3cf: 41 54 push %r12
ffffffff8109f3d1: 49 c7 c6 80 6e 01 00 mov $0x16e80,%r14
ffffffff8109f3d8: 53 push %rbx
...
ffffffff8109f48c: 5b pop %rbx
ffffffff8109f48d: 41 5c pop %r12
ffffffff8109f48f: 41 5d pop %r13
ffffffff8109f491: 41 5e pop %r14
ffffffff8109f493: 41 5f pop %r15
ffffffff8109f495: 5d pop %rbp
ffffffff8109f496: c3 retq
> I really don't see how it would happen here - that code doesn't look
> particularly odd.
>
> And the fentry code used by the function tracer can certainly screw
> things up, but even that would be hard-pressed to screw up %rbp, since
> the saving of rbp comes *after* fentry. Old pre-__fentry__ gcc
> versions had a much higher likelihood (the whole mcount thing is a
> disaster, but I'm assuming you have a compiler that does __fentry__
> and have CC_USING_FENTRY set?)
Yep, -mfentry in use obviously from the dump above, it is compiled by
gcc 5.3.1 rev231346.
thanks,
--
js
suse labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists