netdev - Re: possible unannotated irqs-off

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: <CAMyjOU+1CAC-VLL0JBABnbzWGZPLncqy6jXWQpVkd6vnXi-3pA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:55:12 -0200
From:   Ricardo Nabinger Sanchez <rnsanchez@...il.com>
To:     unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: possible unannotated irqs-off

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 5:46 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
wrote:

> From: Ricardo Nabinger Sanchez <rnsanchez@...il.com>
> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:28:58 -0200
>
> > [   93.509167]  ? jtcp_rcv_established+0x8e/0x2d0
> > [   93.509173]  jtcp_rcv_established+0x8e/0x2d0
>
> What are you using this TCP probe for?  That's where the locking
> problem is happening.
>

I just have a kernel build with most tracing/profiling things included
for the sake of LTTng and perf being as verbose as possible.  It's all
vanilla, I haven't patched or modified any of the code.

My way of reproducing it is checking for updates for my Slackware64
system (i.e., "slackpkg update").

Cheers,

-- 
Ricardo Nabinger Sanchez    http://rnsanchez.wait4.org/
        "You never learned anything by doing it right."