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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 19:12:30 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, pavel@...x.de, jonathanh@...dia.com, f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com, slade@...dewatkins.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.15 000/251] 5.15.47-rc2 review On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 10:08:27AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 08:36:08AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 08:19:49PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.15.47 release. > > > There are 251 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > > > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > > > let me know. > > > > > > Responses should be made by Wed, 15 Jun 2022 18:18:03 +0000. > > > Anything received after that time might be too late. > > > > > > > Build results: > > total: 159 pass: 159 fail: 0 > > Qemu test results: > > total: 488 pass: 488 fail: 0 > > > > I spoke a bit too early. I see the following backtrace in some qemu arm > boot tests. > > BUG: spinlock bad magic on CPU#0, kdevtmpfs/15 > lock: noop_backing_dev_info+0x6c/0x3b0, .magic: 00000000, .owner: <none>/-1, .owner_cpu: 0 > CPU: 0 PID: 15 Comm: kdevtmpfs Not tainted 5.15.47-rc2-00252-g677f0128d0ed #1 > Hardware name: ARM RealView Machine (Device Tree Support) > [<c01101d0>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c010bc0c>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14) > [<c010bc0c>] (show_stack) from [<c0a10ae4>] (dump_stack_lvl+0x68/0x90) > [<c0a10ae4>] (dump_stack_lvl) from [<c0191250>] (do_raw_spin_lock+0xbc/0x124) > [<c0191250>] (do_raw_spin_lock) from [<c02eb578>] (__mark_inode_dirty+0x1cc/0x704) > [<c02eb578>] (__mark_inode_dirty) from [<c02e6a74>] (simple_setattr+0x44/0x5c) > [<c02e6a74>] (simple_setattr) from [<c02d7a18>] (notify_change+0x400/0x45c) > [<c02d7a18>] (notify_change) from [<c0a19ef8>] (devtmpfsd+0x1f8/0x2b8) > [<c0a19ef8>] (devtmpfsd) from [<c014cf3c>] (kthread+0x150/0x17c) > [<c014cf3c>] (kthread) from [<c0100120>] (ret_from_fork+0x14/0x34) > Exception stack(0xd00dbfb0 to 0xd00dbff8) > bfa0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 > bfc0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 > bfe0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000013 00000000 > > This bisects to commit bc5d960d4e58 ("writeback: Fix inode->i_io_list not > be protected by inode->i_lock error"). The problem is also seen in the > mainline kernel. v5.15.y.queue and later are affected. Reverting the patch > here and in mainline fixes the problem. Thanks for letting me know. Hopefully it gets fixed in upstream...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists