| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <939d53060802140859j4f0352dofad03d45bc6ba8e2@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:59:39 +0100
From: "Benjamin Thery" <ben.thery@...il.com>
To: "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: blaschka@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] race in generic address resolution
I ran some additional tests and these traces may also be usefull.
They appears before the soft-lockup are detected.
fermi:~# ping6 -c 500 -f 2007::1
PING 2007::1(2007::1) 56 data bytes
.
=======================================================
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.25-rc1-00113-g69cc64d-dirty #34
-------------------------------------------------------
ping6/1058 is trying to acquire lock:
(&tbl->lock){-+-+}, at: [<c02691ac>] neigh_lookup+0x43/0xa2
but task is already holding lock:
(&n->lock){-+..}, at: [<c026b620>] neigh_timer_handler+0x16/0x252
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (&n->lock){-+..}:
[<c01330b8>] __lock_acquire+0x947/0xafc
[<c026982c>] neigh_periodic_timer+0x99/0x142
[<c01332d0>] lock_acquire+0x63/0x80
[<c026982c>] neigh_periodic_timer+0x99/0x142
[<c02eba61>] _write_lock+0x19/0x28
[<c026982c>] neigh_periodic_timer+0x99/0x142
[<c026982c>] neigh_periodic_timer+0x99/0x142
[<c0120c90>] run_timer_softirq+0xfe/0x159
[<c0269793>] neigh_periodic_timer+0x0/0x142
[<c011dbfa>] __do_softirq+0x6f/0xe9
[<c011dcae>] do_softirq+0x3a/0x52
[<c011dfc3>] irq_exit+0x44/0x46
[<c010d680>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x71/0x81
[<c0103747>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x33/0x38
[<c014e0ce>] mmap_region+0xe1/0x376
[<c014e680>] arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown+0x0/0x12e
[<c014e625>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x1e2/0x23d
[<c0181895>] elf_map+0xd8/0x104
[<c0182072>] load_elf_binary+0x5b4/0x11cd
[<c015ed73>] search_binary_handler+0x74/0x164
[<c0181abe>] load_elf_binary+0x0/0x11cd
[<c015ed7a>] search_binary_handler+0x7b/0x164
[<c015ff2e>] do_execve+0x121/0x16a
[<c01012e3>] sys_execve+0x29/0x52
[<c0102c56>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
[<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
-> #0 (&tbl->lock){-+-+}:
[<c0132fdf>] __lock_acquire+0x86e/0xafc
[<c01332d0>] lock_acquire+0x63/0x80
[<c02691ac>] neigh_lookup+0x43/0xa2
[<c02ebae9>] _read_lock_bh+0x1e/0x2d
[<c02691ac>] neigh_lookup+0x43/0xa2
[<c02691ac>] neigh_lookup+0x43/0xa2
[<c02af858>] ndisc_dst_alloc+0xb5/0x155
[<c02b240d>] __ndisc_send+0x72/0x3f5
[<c02a573b>] ip6_output+0x0/0xaad
[<c0133225>] __lock_acquire+0xab4/0xafc
[<c02b2fb5>] ndisc_send_ns+0x63/0x6e
[<c02eb92c>] _read_unlock_bh+0x25/0x28
[<c02b3f3e>] ndisc_solicit+0x183/0x18d
[<c0121071>] __mod_timer+0x96/0xa1
[<c026b81e>] neigh_timer_handler+0x214/0x252
[<c0120c90>] run_timer_softirq+0xfe/0x159
[<c026b60a>] neigh_timer_handler+0x0/0x252
[<c011dbfa>] __do_softirq+0x6f/0xe9
[<c011dcae>] do_softirq+0x3a/0x52
[<c011dfc3>] irq_exit+0x44/0x46
[<c0105273>] do_IRQ+0x5a/0x73
[<c0103666>] common_interrupt+0x2e/0x34
[<c02ebd3a>] _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x38/0x3c
[<c02188fb>] tty_ldisc_deref+0x5c/0x63
[<c021a5bd>] tty_write+0x1a8/0x1b9
[<c021c5e1>] write_chan+0x0/0x2a9
[<c021a633>] redirected_tty_write+0x65/0x72
[<c021a5ce>] redirected_tty_write+0x0/0x72
[<c015be18>] vfs_write+0x8c/0x108
[<c015c3a2>] sys_write+0x3b/0x60
[<c0102c56>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
[<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
other info that might help us debug this:
1 lock held by ping6/1058:
#0: (&n->lock){-+..}, at: [<c026b620>] neigh_timer_handler+0x16/0x252
stack backtrace:
Pid: 1058, comm: ping6 Not tainted 2.6.25-rc1-netns-00113-g69cc64d-dirty #34
[<c013176b>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x5b/0x66
[<c0132fdf>] __lock_acquire+0x86e/0xafc
[<c01332d0>] lock_acquire+0x63/0x80
[<c02691ac>] ? neigh_lookup+0x43/0xa2
[<c02ebae9>] _read_lock_bh+0x1e/0x2d
[<c02691ac>] ? neigh_lookup+0x43/0xa2
[<c02691ac>] neigh_lookup+0x43/0xa2
[<c02af858>] ndisc_dst_alloc+0xb5/0x155
[<c02b240d>] __ndisc_send+0x72/0x3f5
[<c02a573b>] ? ip6_output+0x0/0xaad
[<c0133225>] ? __lock_acquire+0xab4/0xafc
[<c02b2fb5>] ndisc_send_ns+0x63/0x6e
[<c02eb92c>] ? _read_unlock_bh+0x25/0x28
[<c02b3f3e>] ndisc_solicit+0x183/0x18d
[<c0121071>] ? __mod_timer+0x96/0xa1
[<c026b81e>] neigh_timer_handler+0x214/0x252
[<c0120c90>] run_timer_softirq+0xfe/0x159
[<c026b60a>] ? neigh_timer_handler+0x0/0x252
[<c011dbfa>] __do_softirq+0x6f/0xe9
[<c011dcae>] do_softirq+0x3a/0x52
[<c011dfc3>] irq_exit+0x44/0x46
[<c0105273>] do_IRQ+0x5a/0x73
[<c0103666>] common_interrupt+0x2e/0x34
[<c02ebd3a>] ? _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x38/0x3c
[<c02188fb>] tty_ldisc_deref+0x5c/0x63
[<c021a5bd>] tty_write+0x1a8/0x1b9
[<c021c5e1>] ? write_chan+0x0/0x2a9
[<c021a633>] redirected_tty_write+0x65/0x72
[<c021a5ce>] ? redirected_tty_write+0x0/0x72
[<c015be18>] vfs_write+0x8c/0x108
[<c015c3a2>] sys_write+0x3b/0x60
[<c0102c56>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
=======================
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Benjamin Thery <ben.thery@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems this patch hangs my machine very quickly when there are some
> ICMPv6 traffic.
>
> I'm using net-2.6, pulled today (14th Feb).
>
> I had some unexpected hangs on my SMP test machines and I bisected the
> problem to 69cc64d8d92bf852f933e90c888dfff083bd4fc9
> "[NDISC]: Fix race in generic address resolution".
>
> Looks like a deadlock:
> "BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s! [swapper:0]"
>
> Here are some traces printed on the console:
>
> Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted (2.6.25-rc1-netns-00113-g69cc64d-dirty #34)
> EIP: 0060:[<c02eb5f6>] EFLAGS: 00000287 CPU: 0
> EIP is at __write_lock_failed+0xa/0x20
> EAX: c7b3fab4 EBX: c7b3fab4 ECX: 00000000 EDX: c0377986
> ESI: c7b3fa90 EDI: c7b6f290 EBP: c03cbd24 ESP: c03cbd24
> DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0000 SS: 0068
> CR0: 8005003b CR2: b7f9b404 CR3: 07ac8000 CR4: 00000690
> DR0: 00000000 DR1: 00000000 DR2: 00000000 DR3: 00000000
> DR6: 00000000 DR7: 00000000
> [<c020e43f>] _raw_write_lock+0x57/0x6c
> [<c02eba95>] _write_lock_bh+0x25/0x2d
> [<c026b107>] ? neigh_resolve_output+0x93/0x238
> [<c026b107>] neigh_resolve_output+0x93/0x238
> [<c02a5635>] ip6_output2+0x241/0x289
> [<c02a61cd>] ip6_output+0xa92/0xaad
> [<c025ff11>] ? __alloc_skb+0x4f/0xfb
> [<c02b2596>] ? __ndisc_send+0x1fb/0x3f5
> [<c02b26a0>] __ndisc_send+0x305/0x3f5
> [<c02b2fb5>] ndisc_send_ns+0x63/0x6e
> [<c02b3f3e>] ndisc_solicit+0x183/0x18d
> [<c0121071>] ? __mod_timer+0x96/0xa1
> [<c026b81e>] neigh_timer_handler+0x214/0x252
> [<c0120c90>] run_timer_softirq+0xfe/0x159
> [<c026b60a>] ? neigh_timer_handler+0x0/0x252
> [<c011dbfa>] __do_softirq+0x6f/0xe9
> [<c011dcae>] do_softirq+0x3a/0x52
> [<c011dfc3>] irq_exit+0x44/0x46
> [<c0105273>] do_IRQ+0x5a/0x73
> [<c0103666>] common_interrupt+0x2e/0x34
> [<c0101954>] ? default_idle+0x4a/0x77
> [<c010190a>] ? default_idle+0x0/0x77
> [<c0101855>] cpu_idle+0x89/0x9d
> [<c02e6135>] rest_init+0x49/0x4b
> =======================
> BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s! [swapper:0]
>
> Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted (2.6.25-rc1-netns-00113-g69cc64d-dirty #34)
> EIP: 0060:[<c02eb5f6>] EFLAGS: 00000287 CPU: 1
> EIP is at __write_lock_failed+0xa/0x20
> EAX: c7b3fab4 EBX: c7b3fab4 ECX: 00000000 EDX: 00000000
> ESI: c03bb9c0 EDI: c7b3fab4 EBP: c7841eb0 ESP: c7841eb0
> DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0000 SS: 0068
> CR0: 8005003b CR2: 08560008 CR3: 07b04000 CR4: 00000690
> DR0: 00000000 DR1: 00000000 DR2: 00000000 DR3: 00000000
> DR6: 00000000 DR7: 00000000
> [<c020e43f>] _raw_write_lock+0x57/0x6c
> [<c02eba68>] _write_lock+0x20/0x28
> [<c026982c>] ? neigh_periodic_timer+0x99/0x142
> [<c026982c>] neigh_periodic_timer+0x99/0x142
> [<c0120c90>] run_timer_softirq+0xfe/0x159
> [<c0269793>] ? neigh_periodic_timer+0x0/0x142
> [<c011dbfa>] __do_softirq+0x6f/0xe9
> [<c011dcae>] do_softirq+0x3a/0x52
> [<c011dfc3>] irq_exit+0x44/0x46
> [<c010d680>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x71/0x81
> [<c0103747>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x33/0x38
> [<c0101954>] ? default_idle+0x4a/0x77
> [<c010190a>] ? default_idle+0x0/0x77
> [<c0101855>] cpu_idle+0x89/0x9d
> =======================
> BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 61s! [swapper:0]
>
> Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted (2.6.25-rc1-netns-00113-g69cc64d-dirty #34)
> EIP: 0060:[<c02eb5f6>] EFLAGS: 00000287 CPU: 0
> EIP is at __write_lock_failed+0xa/0x20
> EAX: c7b3fab4 EBX: c7b3fab4 ECX: 00000000 EDX: c0377986
> ESI: c7b3fa90 EDI: c7b6f290 EBP: c03cbd24 ESP: c03cbd24
> DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0000 SS: 0068
> CR0: 8005003b CR2: b7f9b404 CR3: 07ac8000 CR4: 00000690
> DR0: 00000000 DR1: 00000000 DR2: 00000000 DR3: 00000000
> DR6: 00000000 DR7: 00000000
> [<c020e43f>] _raw_write_lock+0x57/0x6c
> [<c02eba95>] _write_lock_bh+0x25/0x2d
> [<c026b107>] ? neigh_resolve_output+0x93/0x238
> [<c026b107>] neigh_resolve_output+0x93/0x238
> [<c02a5635>] ip6_output2+0x241/0x289
> [<c02a61cd>] ip6_output+0xa92/0xaad
> [<c025ff11>] ? __alloc_skb+0x4f/0xfb
> [<c02b2596>] ? __ndisc_send+0x1fb/0x3f5
> [<c02b26a0>] __ndisc_send+0x305/0x3f5
> [<c02b2fb5>] ndisc_send_ns+0x63/0x6e
> [<c02b3f3e>] ndisc_solicit+0x183/0x18d
> [<c0121071>] ? __mod_timer+0x96/0xa1
> [<c026b81e>] neigh_timer_handler+0x214/0x252
> [<c0120c90>] run_timer_softirq+0xfe/0x159
> [<c026b60a>] ? neigh_timer_handler+0x0/0x252
> [<c011dbfa>] __do_softirq+0x6f/0xe9
> [<c011dcae>] do_softirq+0x3a/0x52
> [<c011dfc3>] irq_exit+0x44/0x46
> [<c0105273>] do_IRQ+0x5a/0x73
> [<c0103666>] common_interrupt+0x2e/0x34
> [<c0101954>] ? default_idle+0x4a/0x77
> [<c010190a>] ? default_idle+0x0/0x77
> [<c0101855>] cpu_idle+0x89/0x9d
> [<c02e6135>] rest_init+0x49/0x4b
> =======================
> BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s! [swapper:0]
> ...
>
>
> Benjamin
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 6:47 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> > From: Frank Blaschka <blaschka@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:01:20 +0100
> >
> >
> > > we run your patch during the weekend on single CPU and SMP
> > > machines. We do not see any problems. Thanks for providing the fix.
> >
> > Thanks for testing Frank, I can now push this fix upstream.
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists