linux-kernel - Re: Kernel 4.17.4 lockup

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CALCETrXEBhNsxZtbiG+Mh2r3hka27qRgn6J=mx-krXq4n86Ayg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Jul 2018 10:36:13 -0700
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To:     "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Kernel 4.17.4 lockup

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:29 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@...il.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 9:53 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
>>> On 07/11/2018 09:29 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>>> # It takes about 3 hour to bootstrap x86-64 GCC and 3 hour to run tests,
>>>>>> TIMEOUT=480
>>>>>> # Run it every hour,
>>>>>> 30 * * * * /export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-x32/gcc-build -mx32
>>>>>> --with-pic > /dev/null 2>&1
>>>>> Oh, fun, one of those.
>>>>>
>>>>> How long does it take to reproduce?
>>>> About 5 hours.
>>>
>>> It would be much appreciated if you can get a console of some kind on
>>> that system and try to get a full KASAN oops out of it.  Serial, usb
>>> debug, or maybe netconsole would probably work.
>>
>> I don't have serial ports. I will try netconsole.
>>
>>> I'll also try to get it running on a big system and see if it triggers
>>> faster there.
>>
>> I have seen it on machines with various amounts of cores and RAMs.
>> It triggers the fastest on 8 cores with 6GB RAM reliably.
>
> Here is the first kernel message.

I find myself wondering if this is somehow the same issue as below:

https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=2c33dff2a2138d709b43671603dc01d65b28a689

We could plausibly have a problem with the entry code, but I don't see
anything relevant in the changelog.