netdev - Re: bug report: WARNING in bonding

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]

Date:   Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:33:07 +0200
From:   Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
To:     Tariq Toukan <ttoukan.linux@...il.com>
Cc:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
        Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
        Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...dia.com>,
        Itay Aveksis <itayav@...dia.com>,
        Ran Rozenstein <ranro@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: bug report: WARNING in bonding

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 05:54:30PM +0200, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/12/2020 5:46 PM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 05:38:44PM +0200, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > In the past ~2-3 weeks, we started seeing the following WARNING and traces
> > > in our regression testing systems, almost every day.
> > > 
> > > Reproduction is not stable, and not isolated to a specific test, so it's
> > > hard to bisect.
> > > 
> > > Any idea what could this be?
> > > Or what is the suspected offending patch?
> > 
> > Do you have commit f8e48a3dca06 ("lockdep: Fix preemption WARN for spurious
> > IRQ-enable")? I think it fixed the issue for me
> > 
> 
> We do have it. Yet issue still exists.

I checked my mail and apparently we stopped seeing this warning after I
fixed a lockdep issue (spin_lock() vs spin_lock_bh()) in a yet to be
submitted patch. Do you see any other lockdep warnings in the log
besides this one? Maybe something in mlx4/5 which is why syzbot didn't
hit it?