linux-kernel - Re: [lkp-robot] [mm, memcg] b4536f0c82: kobject(#):tried_to_init_an_initialized_object,something_is_seriously

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: <20170612074427.GB7476@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:44:28 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@...el.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Nils Holland <nholland@...ys.org>,
        Klaus Ethgen <Klaus@...gen.de>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lkp@...org
Subject: Re: [lkp-robot] [mm, memcg]  b4536f0c82:
 kobject(#):tried_to_init_an_initialized_object,something_is_seriously_wrong

On Mon 12-06-17 14:59:45, kernel test robot wrote:
> 
> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
> 
> commit: b4536f0c829c8586544c94735c343f9b5070bd01 ("mm, memcg: fix the active list aging for lowmem requests when memcg is enabled")
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> 
> in testcase: boot

This is really strange. The commit is merged since 4.10-rc4 and this is
the first time I can see a report like this. Is there anything new in
your testing setup? The effect on the x86_64 without movable zones
should be pretty much a noop.

> [    4.442394] g_mass_storage usbip-vudc.0: failed to start g_mass_storage: -22
> [    4.443795] usbip-vudc: probe of usbip-vudc.0 failed with error -22
> [    4.445075] i8042: PNP: PS/2 Controller [PNP0303:KBD,PNP0f13:MOU] at 0x60,0x64 irq 1,12
> [    4.447707] serio: i8042 KBD port at 0x60,0x64 irq 1
> [    4.448652] serio: i8042 KBD port at 0x60,0x64 irq 12
> [    4.449626] kobject (ffff902eda7d6d58): tried to init an initialized object, something is seriously wrong.

This sounds suspicious!

> [    4.451431] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper Not tainted 4.10.0-rc3-00070-gb4536f0c8 #1
> [    4.452774] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000008
> [    4.452784] IP: process_one_work+0x37/0x500
> [    4.452786] PGD 0 
> [    4.452787] 
> [    4.452788] Oops: 0000 [#1]
> [    4.452792] CPU: 0 PID: 21 Comm: kworker/0:1 Not tainted 4.10.0-rc3-00070-gb4536f0c8 #1
> [    4.452793] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.9.3-20161025_171302-gandalf 04/01/2014
> [    4.452801] task: ffff902edf6f6e00 task.stack: ffff902edf7a0000
> [    4.452804] RIP: 0010:process_one_work+0x37/0x500
> [    4.452805] RSP: 0000:ffff902edf7a3e58 EFLAGS: 00010046
> [    4.452807] RAX: ffff902edc3ae800 RBX: ffff902edf788930 RCX: ffff902edfb13960
> [    4.452808] RDX: ffff902edc3ae800 RSI: ffff902edc3ad000 RDI: ffff902edf788900
> [    4.452809] RBP: ffff902edf7a3e98 R08: ffff902edfb13040 R09: ffff902edf62c651
> [    4.452811] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000800 R12: ffffffff9964bb80
> [    4.452812] R13: ffff902edf788900 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: ffff902edc3ad000
> [    4.452815] FS:  0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffffffff99631000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> [    4.452816] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> [    4.452817] CR2: 00000000000000a8 CR3: 000000001720e000 CR4: 00000000000006f0
> [    4.452823] Call Trace:
> [    4.452827]  worker_thread+0x2ae/0x680
> [    4.452832]  kthread+0x10b/0x140
> [    4.452834]  ? process_one_work+0x500/0x500
> [    4.452836]  ? __kthread_create_on_node+0x190/0x190

And this trace is nowhere close to the reclaim path. So is it possible
that this is just a fallout of some other earlier errors? How
reproducible is it?

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs