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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CALCETrXQe9MBJ4JmA3wUD8xHmXMzWw3yAXNsq0oNoFMQBaj1hg@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 10:03:40 -0700 From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> To: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 0 at arch/x86/mm/tlb.c:237 initialize_tlbstate_and_flush+0x120/0x130 On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 2:25 AM, Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de> wrote: > Dear Andy, > > > On 09/10/17 19:42, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >> On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 11:48 PM, Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de> >> wrote: > > >>> With Linux built from commit 4dfc2788033d (Merge tag >>> 'iommu-updates-v4.14' >>> of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/joro/iommu), I get the >>> warning below on a Lenovo X60t with a 32-bit CPU. >> >> >> Indeed. I sent a patch this morning. The warning is harmless -- the >> warning condition has a typo. > > > I am still seeing this with commit 711aab1dbb32 (vfs: constify path argument > to kernel_read_file_from_path), which is the latest from Linus’ master > branch. > > ``` > [ 0.004000] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 0.004000] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 0 at arch/x86/mm/tlb.c:257 > initialize_tlbstate_and_flush+0x120/0x130 > [ 0.004000] Modules linked in: > [ 0.004000] CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Not tainted 4.13.0+ #132 > [ 0.004000] Hardware name: LENOVO 636338U/636338U, BIOS CBET4000 TIMELESS > 01/01/1970 > [ 0.004000] task: f4113380 task.stack: f4118000 > [ 0.004000] EIP: initialize_tlbstate_and_flush+0x120/0x130 > [ 0.004000] EFLAGS: 00210006 CPU: 1 > [ 0.004000] EAX: 159bd000 EBX: d5892d00 ECX: d59c0000 EDX: 159c0000 > [ 0.004000] ESI: 00000000 EDI: 00000000 EBP: f4119f60 ESP: f4119f50 > [ 0.004000] DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 00e0 SS: 0068 > [ 0.004000] CR0: 80050033 CR2: 00000000 CR3: 159bd000 CR4: 00000690 > [ 0.004000] Call Trace: > [ 0.004000] cpu_init+0xc3/0x260 > [ 0.004000] start_secondary+0x33/0x1c0 > [ 0.004000] startup_32_smp+0x164/0x166 > [ 0.004000] Code: 04 00 00 00 00 89 c8 50 9d 8d 74 26 00 83 c3 10 81 fb > 4c 50 9b d5 75 c9 58 5b 5e 5f 5d c3 90 8d 74 26 00 0f ff e9 3c ff ff ff 90 > <0f> ff e9 13 ff ff ff 89 f6 8d bc 27 00 00 00 00 3e 8d 74 26 00 > [ 0.004000] ---[ end trace 17f2b31512589856 ]--- > ``` I can reproduce this on a 32-bit build. The code is Obviously Correct (tm), so I'm adding tracing to figure out what's going on. Stay tuned...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists