[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1504156925.4670.43.camel@neuling.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:22:05 +1000
From: Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@....fi>
Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
Nathan March <nathan@...net>, centos-virt@...tos.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Status of reverted Linux patch "tty: Fix ldisc crash on
reopened tty", Linux 4.9 kernel frequent crashes
On Thu, 2017-08-31 at 06:36 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:10:14PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > Recently Nathan March reported on centos-virt list he's getting frequent
> > Linux kernel crashes with Linux 4.9 LTS kernel because of the missing patch
> > "tty: Fix ldisc crash on reopened tty".
>
> Crashes with "normal" operation, or crashes when running a fuzzer or
> other type of program?
For me it crashed on boot.
>
> > The patch was already merged upstream here:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i
> > d=71472fa9c52b1da27663c275d416d8654b905f05
> >
> > but then reverted here:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i
> > d=896d81fefe5d1919537db2c2150ab6384e4a6610
> >
> > Nathan confirmed if he applies the patch from
> > 71472fa9c52b1da27663c275d416d8654b905f05 to his Linux 4.9 LTS kernel the
> > bug/problem goes away, so the patch (or similar fix) is still needed, at
> > least for 4.9 LTS kernel.
> >
> >
> > Mikulas reported he's able to trigger the same crash on Linux 4.10:
> > https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2440637.html
> > https://lists.gt.net/linux/kernel/2664604?search_string=ldisc%20reopened;#26
> > 64604
> >
> > Michael Neuling reported he's able to trigger the bug on PowerPC:
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/10/1582
> >
> >
> > So now the question is.. is anyone currently working on getting this patch
> > fixed and applied upstream? I think one of the problems earlier was being
> > able to reliable reproduce the crash.. Nathan says he's able to reproduce it
> > many times per week on his environment on x86_64.
>
> I don't know of anyone working on it, want to do it yourself?
I'm not anymore. We found it was only triggered on a bogus CONFIG option
combination. Once we removed that, it no longer happened.
The underlying bug was still there though.
Mikey
Powered by blists - more mailing lists