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: <cea84b66-2ad5-76af-3feb-418b78cdd87@ewheeler.net> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 16:41:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Eric Wheeler <netdev@...ts.ewheeler.net> To: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: BUG: looking up invalid subclass: 8 Hello all: We are running Linux 6.5.7 and are getting the following trace in dmesg. I found a similar backtrace that was fixed in 3510c7aa069aa83a2de6dab2b41401a198317bdc . It was for ALSA, but had the same BUG of "looking up invalid subclass: 8" and the fix was trivial, noting that MAX_HOPS shouldn't be bigger than MAX_LOCKDEP_SUBCLASSES. Is there a simple fix for this in netlink, too? ]# ./scripts/decode_stacktrace.sh vmlinux `pwd` < stackdump.txt [ 113.347055] BUG: looking up invalid subclass: 8 [ 113.357387] turning off the locking correctness validator. [ 113.364842] Hardware name: Supermicro Super Server/H11SSL-i, BIOS 2.4 12/27/2021 [ 113.373614] Call Trace: [ 113.381874] <TASK> [ 113.382556] dump_stack_lvl (lib/dump_stack.c:108) [ 113.388816] look_up_lock_class (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:941) [ 113.399562] register_lock_class (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:1284 (discriminator 13)) [ 113.400238] ? srso_return_thunk (arch/x86/lib/retpoline.S:308) [ 113.403627] __lock_acquire (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5014) [ 113.414652] lock_acquire.part.0 (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:467 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5755) [ 113.428619] ? srso_return_thunk (arch/x86/lib/retpoline.S:308) [ 113.435463] ? lock_acquire (./include/trace/events/lock.h:24 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5724) [ 113.440620] _raw_spin_lock_nested (kernel/locking/spinlock.c:379) [ 113.462749] ? __nla_validate_parse (lib/nlattr.c:606) [ 113.471052] genl_family_rcv_msg_doit.isra.0 (net/netlink/genetlink.c:970) [ 113.471651] genl_family_rcv_msg (net/netlink/genetlink.c:1050) [ 113.483623] genl_rcv_msg (net/netlink/genetlink.c:1069) [ 113.489055] ? __pfx_genl_rcv_msg (net/netlink/genetlink.c:1056) [ 113.489623] netlink_rcv_skb (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2519) [ 113.492711] genl_rcv (net/netlink/genetlink.c:1079) [ 113.502610] netlink_unicast (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1338 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1363) [ 113.506927] netlink_sendmsg (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1885) [ 113.507486] sock_write_iter (net/socket.c:725 net/socket.c:740 net/socket.c:1147) [ 113.510657] vfs_write (./include/linux/fs.h:1877 fs/read_write.c:491 fs/read_write.c:584) [ 113.519624] ksys_write (fs/read_write.c:637) [ 113.524713] do_syscall_64 (arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80) [ 113.525233] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe (arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:120) [ 113.526621] RIP: 0033:0x7f41c473e987 [ 113.535618] Code: 0b 00 f7 d8 64 89 02 48 c7 c0 ff ff ff ff eb b7 0f 1f 00 f3 0f 1e fa 64 8b 04 25 18 00 00 00 85 Code starting with the faulting instruction =========================================== 0: 0b 00 or (%rax),%eax 2: f7 d8 neg %eax 4: 64 89 02 mov %eax,%fs:(%rdx) 7: 48 c7 c0 ff ff ff ff mov $0xffffffffffffffff,%rax e: eb b7 jmp 0xffffffffffffffc7 10: 0f 1f 00 nopl (%rax) 13: f3 0f 1e fa endbr64 17: 64 8b 04 25 18 00 00 mov %fs:0x18,%eax 1e: 00 1f: 85 .byte 0x85 c0 75 10 b8 01 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 51 c3 48 83 ec 28 48 89 54 24 18 48 89 74 24 [ 113.543013] RSP: 002b:00007ffe80a28648 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000001 [ 113.543627] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00000000000000c8 RCX: 00007f41c473e987 [ 113.552607] RDX: 00000000000000c8 RSI: 000055be8e4f7320 RDI: 0000000000000004 [ 113.560243] RBP: 000055be8e4f7320 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 [ 113.560803] R10: 0000000000001000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00000000000000c8 [ 113.561353] R13: 0000000000000004 R14: 00007ffe80a28970 R15: 000055be8d383848 [ 113.569626] </TASK> -- Eric Wheeler
Powered by blists - more mailing lists