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  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]
Date:   Thu, 21 Dec 2017 11:19:06 +0100
From:   Dmitry Vyukov <>
To:     Tetsuo Handa <>
Cc:     syzbot 
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
        Kate Stewart <>,
        LKML <>,
        Linux-MM <>,
        Philippe Ombredanne <>,
        Thomas Gleixner <>
Subject: Re: BUG: workqueue lockup (2)

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 11:55 AM, Tetsuo Handa
<> wrote:
> Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Tetsuo Handa
>> <> wrote:
>> > syzbot wrote:
>> >>
>> >> syzkaller has found reproducer for the following crash on
>> >> f3b5ad89de16f5d42e8ad36fbdf85f705c1ae051
>> >
>> > "BUG: workqueue lockup" is not a crash.
>> Hi Tetsuo,
>> What is the proper name for all of these collectively?
> I think that things which lead to kernel panic when /proc/sys/kernel/panic_on_oops
> was set to 1 are called an "oops" (or a "kerneloops").
> Speak of "BUG: workqueue lockup", this is not an "oops". This message was
> added by 82607adcf9cdf40f ("workqueue: implement lockup detector"), and
> this message does not always indicate a fatal problem. This message can be
> printed when the system is really out of CPU and memory. As far as I tested,
> I think that workqueue was not able to run on specific CPU due to a soft
> lockup bug.

There are also warnings which don't panic normally, unless
panic_on_warn is set. There are also cases when we suddenly lost a
machine and have no idea what happened with it. And also cases when we
are kind-a connected, and nothing bad is printed on console, but it's
still un-operable.
The only collective name I can think of is bug. We could change it to
bug. Otherwise since there are multiple names, I don't think it's
worth spending more time on this.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists