On 7/12/19 1:55 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 11:53:12AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 7/10/19 3:09 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
One thing I mentioned when Thomas did the unwinder API changes was
trying to move lockdep over to something like stackdepot.
We can't directly
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 11:53:12AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 7/10/19 3:09 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > One thing I mentioned when Thomas did the unwinder API changes was
> > trying to move lockdep over to something like stackdepot.
> >
> > We can't directly use stackdepot as is, because
On 7/10/19 3:09 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
One thing I mentioned when Thomas did the unwinder API changes was
trying to move lockdep over to something like stackdepot.
We can't directly use stackdepot as is, because it uses locks and memory
allocation, but we could maybe add a lower level API to
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 02:23:39PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> As one can see in remove_class_from_lock_chain() there is already code
> present in lockdep for compacting the chain_hlocks[] array. Similar code
> is not yet available for the stack_trace[] array because I had not
> encountered
On 7/10/19 1:47 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
>
> On 7/10/19 9:09 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 7/10/19 11:44 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> If anything using workqueues in dynamically allocated objects can turn off
>>> lockdep,
>>> we have a serious issue.
>>
>> As far as I know that issue is only
On 7/10/19 9:09 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 7/10/19 11:44 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> If anything using workqueues in dynamically allocated objects can turn off
>> lockdep,
>> we have a serious issue.
>
> As far as I know that issue is only hit by syzbot tests.
> Anyway, I see
> two
On 7/10/19 11:44 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> If anything using workqueues in dynamically allocated objects can turn off
> lockdep,
> we have a serious issue.
As far as I know that issue is only hit by syzbot tests. Anyway, I see
two possible paths forward:
* Revert the patch that makes workqueues
On 7/10/19 8:36 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 7/10/19 11:02 AM, Eric Biggers wrote:
>> I already mentioned that io_uring triggers it too.
>>
>> Those are just 2 cases that syzbot happened to generate reproducers for. I
>> expect there are many others too, since many places in the kernel
On 7/10/19 11:02 AM, Eric Biggers wrote:
> I already mentioned that io_uring triggers it too.
>
> Those are just 2 cases that syzbot happened to generate reproducers for. I
> expect there are many others too, since many places in the kernel allocate
> workqueues. AFAICS most are placed in
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:46:00AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 7/10/19 10:21 AM, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > With my simplified reproducer, on commit 669de8bda87b ("kernel/workqueue:
> > Use
> > dynamic lockdep keys for workqueues") I see:
> >
> > WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 189 at
On 7/10/19 10:21 AM, Eric Biggers wrote:
> With my simplified reproducer, on commit 669de8bda87b ("kernel/workqueue: Use
> dynamic lockdep keys for workqueues") I see:
>
> WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 189 at kernel/locking/lockdep.c:747
> register_lock_class+0x4f6/0x580
>
> and then somewhat
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:00:59AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 07:19:55AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On 7/9/19 10:30 PM, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > [Moved most people to Bcc; syzbot added way too many random people to
> > > this.]
> > >
> > > Hi Bart,
> > >
> > >
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 07:19:55AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 7/9/19 10:30 PM, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > [Moved most people to Bcc; syzbot added way too many random people to this.]
> >
> > Hi Bart,
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 07:17:09PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > On 3/30/19
On 7/9/19 10:30 PM, Eric Biggers wrote:
[Moved most people to Bcc; syzbot added way too many random people to this.]
Hi Bart,
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 07:17:09PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 3/30/19 2:58 PM, syzbot wrote:
syzbot has bisected this bug to:
commit
[Moved most people to Bcc; syzbot added way too many random people to this.]
Hi Bart,
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 07:17:09PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 3/30/19 2:58 PM, syzbot wrote:
> > syzbot has bisected this bug to:
> >
> > commit 669de8bda87b92ab9a2fc663b3f5743c2ad1ae9f
> > Author:
On 3/30/19 2:58 PM, syzbot wrote:
syzbot has bisected this bug to:
commit 669de8bda87b92ab9a2fc663b3f5743c2ad1ae9f
Author: Bart Van Assche
Date: Thu Feb 14 23:00:54 2019 +
kernel/workqueue: Use dynamic lockdep keys for workqueues
bisection log:
syzbot has bisected this bug to:
commit 669de8bda87b92ab9a2fc663b3f5743c2ad1ae9f
Author: Bart Van Assche
Date: Thu Feb 14 23:00:54 2019 +
kernel/workqueue: Use dynamic lockdep keys for workqueues
bisection log: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/bisect.txt?x=17f1bacd20
start
syzbot has found a reproducer for the following crash on:
HEAD commit:0e40da3e Merge tag 'kbuild-fixes-v5.1' of git://git.kernel..
git tree: upstream
console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=14d9123f20
kernel config:
18 matches
Mail list logo
