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  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:   Fri, 9 Dec 2016 01:01:02 +0000
From:   Josef Bacik <>
To:     Eric Dumazet <>
CC:     Hannes Frederic Sowa <>,
        Tom Herbert <>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <>
Subject: Re: Soft lockup in inet_put_port on 4.6

> On Dec 8, 2016, at 7:32 PM, Eric Dumazet <> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2016-12-08 at 16:36 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
>> We can reproduce the problem at will, still trying to run down the 
>> problem.  I'll try and find one of the boxes that dumped a core and get 
>> a bt of everybody.  Thanks,
> OK, sounds good.
> I had a look and :
> - could not spot a fix that came after 4.6. 
> - could not spot an obvious bug.
> Anything special in the program triggering the issue ?
> SO_REUSEPORT and/or special socket options ?

So they recently started using SO_REUSEPORT, that's what triggered it, if they don't use it then everything is fine.

I added some instrumentation for get_port to see if it was looping in there and none of my printk's triggered.  The softlockup messages are always on the inet_bind_bucket lock, sometimes in the process context in get_port or in the softirq context either through inet_put_port or inet_kill_twsk.  On the box that I have a coredump for there's only one processor in the inet code so I'm not sure what to make of that.  That was a box from last week so I'll look at a more recent core and see if it's different.  Thanks,


Powered by blists - more mailing lists