I don't see anything related to OVS in the stack trace, so you would
probably have better luck on the netdev mailing list.
skb->protocol of 8 could be IP that has been truncated to a single byte.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Qianhuibin <qianhui...@huawei.com> wrote:
> Here is the problem.
> I have a network system as flows:
> It has vlan & vxlan on it, and between every two vms, they send tcp&udp.
> After this linux system runs 14 days later, a kernel panic happened. Then I
> analyze Linux kernel crash dumps with crash. Here is the result:
> crash> bt
> PID: 3323 TASK: ffff8801ecdde580 CPU: 1 COMMAND: "xxxxxxx"
> #0 [ffff8801ed0117f0] crash_kexec at ffffffff8008d6fa
> #1 [ffff8801ed0118c0] oops_end at ffffffff8040ec28
> #2 [ffff8801ed0118e0] general_protection at ffffffff8040df08
> [exception RIP: nf_reinject+42]
> RIP: ffffffff803804ca RSP: ffff8801ed011998 RFLAGS: 00010286
> RAX: 3938373635343332 RBX: ffff8801e854e4c0 RCX: ffff88001621d300
> RDX: 0000000000000010 RSI: 0000000000000001 RDI: ffff8801e854e4c0
> RBP: 0000000000000001 R8: 111a2a2928060f77 R9: ff2f2e2d2c070978
> R10: 111a2a2928060f77 R11: ff2f2e2d2c070978 R12: ffff880081b0ee80
> R13: ffff8801ed011a20 R14: 0000000000000001 R15: ffff8801f451657c
> ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffffff CS: e030 SS: e02b
> #3 [ffff8801ed0119d0] nfqnl_recv_verdict at ffffffffa03d7c56 [nfnetlink_queue]
> #4 [ffff8801ed011a10] nfnetlink_rcv_msg at ffffffffa03672d1 [nfnetlink]
> #5 [ffff8801ed011a80] nfnetlink_rcv_msg at ffffffffa036719d [nfnetlink]
> #6 [ffff8801ed011af0] netlink_rcv_skb at ffffffff8037ce29
> #7 [ffff8801ed011b10] nfnetlink_rcv at ffffffffa036715f [nfnetlink]
> #8 [ffff8801ed011b20] netlink_unicast at ffffffff8037ca9f
> #9 [ffff8801ed011b70] netlink_sendmsg at ffffffff8037d7a5
> #10 [ffff8801ed011c00] sock_sendmsg at ffffffff8033eb4b
> #11 [ffff8801ed011d80] ___sys_sendmsg at ffffffff8033fd4b
> #12 [ffff8801ed011f20] __sys_sendmsg at ffffffff8033ff42
> #13 [ffff8801ed011f80] system_call_fastpath at ffffffff80415b23
> RIP: 00007fb12bec4e0d RSP: 00007fb12ae52810 RFLAGS: 00000293
> RAX: 000000000000002e RBX: ffffffff80415b23 RCX: ffffffff800032eb
> RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 00007fb12ae52830 RDI: 0000000000000009
> RBP: 00000000006c1100 R8: 00007fb12ae52c18 R9: 0000000000000001
> R10: 00007fb12b378530 R11: 0000000000000293 R12: 00007fb12ae528f0
> R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 00000001fffffff7 R15: 0000000000000000
> ORIG_RAX: 000000000000002e CS: e033 SS: e02b
>
> Also I analyze the first parameter of nf_reinject, and find that the member
> of indev is freed some where, and the member of skb-> protocol is 8. The
> member of skb is:
> crash> struct sk_buff 0xffff880081b0ee80
> struct sk_buff {
> next = 0x0,
> prev = 0x0,
> tstamp = {
> tv64 = 1422279902816506863
> },
> sk = 0x0,
> dev = 0xffff88008b379000,
> cb =
> "\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000",
> _skb_refdst = 18446612135790802496,
> sp = 0x0,
> len = 336,
> data_len = 0,
> mac_len = 14,
> hdr_len = 0,
> {
> csum = 0,
> {
> csum_start = 0,
> csum_offset = 0
> }
> },
> priority = 0,
> local_df = 0 '\000',
> cloned = 0 '\000',
> ip_summed = 0 '\000',
> nohdr = 0 '\000',
> nfctinfo = 0 '\000',
> pkt_type = 0 '\000',
> fclone = 0 '\000',
> ipvs_property = 0 '\000',
> peeked = 0 '\000',
> nf_trace = 0 '\000',
> protocol = 8,
> destructor = 0,
> nfct = 0xffff88008b2c1198,
> nfct_reasm = 0x0,
> nf_bridge = 0xffff8800064d8180,
> skb_iif = 2,
> tc_index = 0,
> tc_verd = 0,
> rxhash = 3531363220,
> queue_mapping = 4,
> ndisc_nodetype = 0 '\000',
> pfmemalloc = 0 '\000',
> ooo_okay = 0 '\000',
> no_fcs = 0 '\000',
> dma_cookie = 0,
> secmark = 0,
> {
> mark = 0,
> dropcount = 0
> },
> vlan_tci = 0,
> transport_header = 212,
> network_header = 192,
> mac_header = 178,
> tail = 528,
> end = 768,
> head = 0xffff88001621d000 "@\336\071\a\002\210\377\377{\002",
> data = 0xffff88001621d0c0 "E",
> truesize = 2672,
> users = {
> counter = 1
> }
> }
>
> Here is the question: How does this happen? Why there is a protocol is 8? Is
> anybody ever had the same situation before? Thank you!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev@openvswitch.org
> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
