linux-kernel - Re: Bug in Kernel 6.8.x, 6.9.x Causing Trace/Panic During Shutdown/Reboot

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: <CAE4VaRHaijpV1CC9Jo_Lg4tNQb_+=LTHwygOp5Bm2z5ErVzeow@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 07:51:30 +0300
From: Ilkka Naulapää <digirigawa@...il.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)" <regressions@...mhuis.info>, 
	Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>, stable@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bug in Kernel 6.8.x, 6.9.x Causing Trace/Panic During Shutdown/Reboot

yeah, the cache_from_obj tracing bug (without panic) has been
displayed quite some time now - maybe even since 6.7.x or so. I could
try checking a few versions back for this and try bisecting it if I
can find when this started.

--Ilkka

On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 1:31 AM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 May 2024 12:50:08 +0200
> "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)" <regressions@...mhuis.info> wrote:
>
> > > - Affected Versions: Before kernel version 6.8.10, the bug caused a
> > > quick display of a kernel trace dump before the shutdown/reboot
> > > completed. Starting from version 6.8.10 and continuing into version
> > > 6.9.0 and 6.9.1, this issue has escalated to a kernel panic,
> > > preventing the shutdown or reboot from completing and leaving the
> > > machine stuck.
>
> You state "Before kernel version 6.8.10, the bug caused ...". Does that
> mean that a bug was happening before v6.8.10? But did not cause a panic?
>
> I just noticed your second screen shot from your report, and it has:
>
>  "cache_from_obj: Wrong slab cache, tracefs_inode_cache but object is from inode_cache"
>
> So somehow an tracefs_inode was allocated from the inode_cache and is
> now being freed by the tracefs_inode logic? Did this happen before
> 6.8.10? If so, this code could just be triggering an issue from an
> unrelated bug.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -- Steve