linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv3 02/10] ext4: Fix ext4_fc

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]

Date:   Thu, 17 Mar 2022 16:22:08 +0100
From:   Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        Harshad Shirwadkar <harshadshirwadkar@...il.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 02/10] ext4: Fix ext4_fc_stats trace point

Hi,

Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...ux.ibm.com> writes:

> On 22/03/17 01:01PM, Sven Schnelle wrote:
>> Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...ux.ibm.com> writes:
>> I'm getting the following oops with that patch:
>>
>> [    0.937455] VFS: Disk quotas dquot_6.6.0
>> [    0.937474] VFS: Dquot-cache hash table entries: 512 (order 0, 4096 bytes)
>> [    0.958347] Unable to handle kernel pointer dereference in virtual kernel address space
>> [    0.958350] Failing address: 00000000010de000 TEID: 00000000010de407
>> [    0.958353] Fault in home space mode while using kernel ASCE.
>> [    0.958357] AS:0000000001ed0007 R3:00000002ffff0007 S:0000000001003701
>> [    0.958388] Oops: 0004 ilc:3 [#1] SMP
>> [    0.958393] Modules linked in:
>> [    0.958398] CPU: 0 PID: 8 Comm: kworker/u128:0 Not tainted 5.17.0-rc8-next-20220317 #396
>
> I tried running this master branch of linux-next from here [1].
> But I started facing build failures with it.
>
> [1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
>
>> [    0.958403] Hardware name: IBM 3906 M04 704 (z/VM 7.1.0)
>> [    0.958407] Workqueue: eval_map_wq eval_map_work_func
>>
>> [    0.958446] Krnl PSW : 0704e00180000000 000000000090a9d6 (number+0x25e/0x3c0)
>> [    0.958456]            R:0 T:1 IO:1 EX:1 Key:0 M:1 W:0 P:0 AS:3 CC:2 PM:0 RI:0 EA:3
>> [    0.958461] Krnl GPRS: 0000000000000058 00000000010de0ac 0000000000000001 00000000fffffffc
>> [    0.958467]            0000038000047b80 0affffff010de0ab 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
>> [    0.958481]            0000000000000020 0000038000000000 00000000010de0ad 00000000010de0ab
>> [    0.958484]            0000000080312100 0000000000e68910 0000038000047b50 0000038000047ab8
>> [    0.958494] Krnl Code: 000000000090a9c6: f0c84112b001        srp     274(13,%r4),1(%r11),8
>> [    0.958494]            000000000090a9cc: 41202001            la      %r2,1(%r2)
>> [    0.958494]           #000000000090a9d0: ecab0006c065        clgrj   %r10,%r11,12,000000000090a9dc
>> [    0.958494]           >000000000090a9d6: d200b0004000        mvc     0(1,%r11),0(%r4)
>> [    0.958494]            000000000090a9dc: 41b0b001            la      %r11,1(%r11)
>> [    0.958494]            000000000090a9e0: a74bffff
>>             aghi    %r4,-1
>> [    0.958494]            000000000090a9e4: a727fff6            brctg   %r2,000000000090a9d0
>> [    0.958494]            000000000090a9e8: a73affff            ahi     %r3,-1
>> [    0.958575] Call Trace:
>> [    0.958580]  [<000000000090a9d6>] number+0x25e/0x3c0
>> [    0.958594] ([<0000000000289516>] update_event_printk+0xde/0x200)
>> [    0.958602]  [<0000000000910020>] vsnprintf+0x4b0/0x7c8
>> [    0.958606]  [<00000000009103e8>] snprintf+0x40/0x50
>> [    0.958610]  [<00000000002893d2>] eval_replace+0x62/0xc8
>> [    0.958614]  [<000000000028e2fe>] trace_event_eval_update+0x206/0x248
>
> This looks like you must have this patch from Steven as well [2].

Yes, i used vanilla linux-next from 20220317. So i have that one as well.
Looking at that patch it looks like TRACE_DEFINE_ENUM(EXT4_FC_REASON_MAX);
is indeed wanted. Lets wait wether Steve knows what's going on,
otherwise i have to dig into the code and figure out what the problem is.

Thanks
Sven