linux-kernel - Re: [4.14-rc0 regression] Re: x60: warnings on boot and resume, arch/x86/mm/tlb.c:257 initialize_ ... was Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix resume failure due to PCID

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: <CA+55aFys0htimG6C-BYAyJMUSrOg75s8oJM-w8i7BeLrUk6cvA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Sep 2017 11:47:49 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bpetkov@...e.de>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [4.14-rc0 regression] Re: x60: warnings on boot and resume,
 arch/x86/mm/tlb.c:257 initialize_ ... was Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix resume failure
 due to PCID

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 3:22 AM, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:
>
> Let me pull latest...
>
> 711aab1dbb324d321e3d84368a435a78908c7bce
>
> (Strange. Not authored by Linus and old?)

That's the author date, the committer date is new. Top of tree right
now just happens to be a patch I applied, it's much more commonly a
merge I've done.

> But result is still similar, this time with more debug information.
> [    0.116813] x86: Booting SMP configuration:
> [    0.116893] .... node  #0, CPUs:      #1
> [    0.004000] Initializing CPU#1
> [    0.004000] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [    0.004000] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 0 at arch/x86/mm/tlb.c:257 initialize_tlbstate_and_flush+0x2e/0xed
> [    0.004000] Hardware name: LENOVO 17097HU/17097HU, BIOS 7BETD8WW (2.19 ) 03/31/2011
> [    0.004000] task: f5ca2080 task.stack: f5cc4000
> [    0.004000] EIP: initialize_tlbstate_and_flush+0x2e/0xed
> [    0.004000] EFLAGS: 00210087 CPU: 1
> [    0.004000] EAX: 0504b000 EBX: c4f15540 ECX: c4f15710 EDX: 00000000
> [    0.004000] ESI: 04ee7000 EDI: f5ca2080 EBP: f5cc5f54 ESP: f5cc5f44
> [    0.004000]  DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 00e0 SS: 0068
> [    0.004000] CR0: 80050033 CR2: 00000000 CR3: 04ee7000 CR4: 000006b0
> [    0.004000] Call Trace:
> [    0.004000]  cpu_init+0xdc/0x2f0
> [    0.004000]  start_secondary+0x34/0x1c6
> [    0.004000]  startup_32_smp+0x164/0x166
> [    0.004000]  ? startup_32_smp+0x164/0x166
> [    0.004000] Code: 56 53 83 ec 08 64 8b 1d c0 c0 03 c5 b9 10 57 f1 c4 e8 de 65 9e 00 89 45 f0 89 55 f4 0f 20 de 8b 43 20 05 00 00 00 40 39 c6 74 11 <0f> ff 50 56 68 74 9c d8 c4 e8 d1 cd 04 00 83 c4 0c a1 20 90 f8
> [    0.004000] ---[ end trace 7439e29925a49b51 ]---
> [    0.004000] # CR3: 0000000004ee7000, __pa(mm->pgd): 000000000504b000

Ok, clearly Andy didn't get the 32-bit SMP bringup path right.
Presumable tested a 32-bit UP image, or in a single-cpu VM?

Andy?

                   Linus