Hugh,
We had a user report hitting the BUG_ON at the end of shmem_evict_inode.
I see in 3.7 you changed this to a WARN instead.
Does the trace below match the one you described chasing in commit
0f3c42f522dc1ad7e27affc0a4aa8c790bce0a66 ?
Full report at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?i
We had a user report the soft lockup detector kicked after 22
seconds of no progress, with this trace..
:BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 22s! [flush-8:16:3137]
:Pid: 3137, comm: flush-8:16 Not tainted 3.6.7-4.fc17.x86_64 #1
:RIP: 0010:[] [] __list_del_entry+0x2c/0xd0
:Call Trace:
: [] redirty_
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 08:50:03PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> Doesn't that mean that we need these checks everywhere? Or at least a
> fixup in drm core proper?
>
> And I think we need to add trinity to our test setup eventually ;-)
Note that trinity's ioctl fuzzing is still very new (adde
Not sure what I did to trigger this, but it's happened a few times while
fuzzing syscalls.
Rebooted and fscked, didn't find anything wrong.
Dave
[ 5084.436288] EXT4-fs warning (device sda1): ext4_block_to_path:105: block
1874853625 > max in inode 34
[ 5167.723925] EXT4-fs warning (devic
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 08:22:44AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:35:55PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > Not sure what I did to trigger this, but it's happened a few times while
> > fuzzing syscalls.
> > Rebooted and fsc
offlining a CPU in 3.9-rc3 gets me this trace..
numa_remove_cpu cpu 1 node 0: mask now 0,2-3
smpboot: CPU 1 is now offline
BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [] code:
cpu-offline.sh/10591
caller is cmci_rediscover+0x6a/0xe0
Pid: 10591, comm: cpu-offline.sh Not tainted 3.9.0-rc3+
I've been getting enough private mail about the trinity fuzz-tester that
there needs to be some coordination between people patching the same code etc.
To this end, there's now a mailing list..
Send a mail with 'subscribe trinity' in the body to majord...@vger.kernel.org
to subscribe.
My thanks
My Thinkpad T430s suspend/resumes fine most of the time. But every so often
(like one in ten times or so), as soon as I suspend, I get a black screen,
and a blinking power button.
(Note: Not the capslock lights like when we panic, this laptop 'conveniently
doesn't have those. This is the light su
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:02:07AM -0800, dirk.brande...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Dirk Brandewie
>
> This driver implements a scaling driver with an internal governor for
> Intel Core processors. The driver follows the same model as the
> Transmeta scaling driver (longrun.c) and implements
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 04:26:22PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2013, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> > My Thinkpad T430s suspend/resumes fine most of the time. But every so often
> > (like one in ten times or so), as soon as I suspend, I get a black screen,
> &
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 04:26:22PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Me too on T420s, except that is blessed with a blinking CapsLk.
>
> It's so erratic (though I think I see more failures than you do: I'd say
> a quick resume never fails, but an overnight resume fails half the time):
> I'm afra
I see this on boot on one my systems..
==
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
3.9.0-0.rc4.git0.1.fc19.x86_64 #1 Not tainted
---
dhclient-script/350 is trying to acquire lock
On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 03:53:01PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 04/02/2013 01:52 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >>
> >> By just playing with the 'msgsz' parameter with MSG_COPY set.
> >
> > Hmm. Looking closer, I suspect you're testing w
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 10:58:23AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> diff --git a/fs/sysfs/dir.c b/fs/sysfs/dir.c
> index 1bf016b..328ef9b 100644
> --- a/fs/sysfs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/sysfs/dir.c
> @@ -268,6 +268,13 @@ void release_sysfs_dirent(struct sysfs_dirent * sd)
> */
> parent_sd = sd
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 12:25:53PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > [ 93.672257] [] sys_msgctl+0x139/0x400
> > [ 93.674641] [] ? retint_swapgs+0xe/0x13
> > [ 93.677056] [] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x115/0x1a0
> > [ 93.679626] [] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x3a/0x3f
> > [ 93.682159]
Something I've yet to repeat managed to leak a whole bunch of memory
while I was travelling, and locked up my workstation.
When I got home, this was the last thing printed out before it locked up
(it did make it into the logs thankfully) after a bunch of instances of
the oom-killers handywork.
Built from a pull around midnight EST last night.
(Don't have the git hash, as the source is on the disk that is now
inaccessable..)
EXT4-fs error (device sdb1): htree_dirblock_to_tree:919: inode #172235804:
block 152052301: comm ls: bad entry in directory: rec_len is smaller than
minimal - off
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 04:55:39PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:43:11AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > Built from a pull around midnight EST last night.
> > (Don't have the git hash, as the source is on the disk that is now
> > inaccess
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:44:17AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:04:46AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > > EXT4-fs error (device sdb1): htree_dirblock_to_tree:919: inode
> > #172235804: block 152052301: comm ls: bad entry in directory: rec
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 01:49:12PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Markus, Dave, can you confirm that this fixes your problem?
>
> Thanks!!
>
> (Sigh, this is a real brown paper bug; I'm embarassed I missed this in
> my code review.)
Building now. Can you confirm that nothing on-disk should
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 02:04:19PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 01:57:55PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > Building now. Can you confirm that nothing on-disk should be awry ?
> > Or will I need a new fsck to detect what happened ?
> >
>
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 07:56:25PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2013.02.27 at 13:49 -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>
> > Markus, Dave, can you confirm that this fixes your problem?
>
> Yes, it fixes the issue.
Looks like it's fixed here too.
How did this make it through -next withou
Just hit this on Linus' current tree.
[ 89.621770] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
00c8
[ 89.623111] IP: [] commit_creds+0x250/0x2f0
[ 89.624062] PGD 122bfd067 PUD 122bfe067 PMD 0
[ 89.624901] Oops: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
[ 89.625678] Modules linked
[ 39.878535] =
[ 39.879670] [ BUG: rpc.nfsd/666 still has locks held! ]
[ 39.880871] 3.8.0+ #3 Not tainted
[ 39.881858] -
[ 39.882850] 2 locks on stack by rpc.nfsd/666:
[ 39.883868] #0: held: (nfsd_mutex){+.+.+
general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
Modules linked in: can af_rxrpc binfmt_misc scsi_transport_iscsi ax25 ipt_ULOG
decnet nfc appletalk x25 rds ipx p8023 psnap p8022 llc irda crc_ccitt atm lockd
sunrpc ip6t_REJECT nf_conntrack_ipv6 nf_defrag_ipv6 xt_conntrack nf_conntr
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 01:18:25PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >> [ 169.930103] ---[ end trace 4d135f3def21b4bd ]---
> >>
> >> The code translates to the following in fs/pipe.c:alloc_pipe_info :
> >>
> >> pipe = kzalloc(sizeof(struct pipe_inode_info), GFP_KERNEL);
> >> if (p
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 04:04:33PM -0500, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
> On 13-02-19 01:37 PM, Tommi Rantala wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Hit this WARNING once while fuzzing the kernel with trinity in a qemu
> > virtual machine as the root user.
> >
> > Does this make any sense? I have occasionally s
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 09:15:31AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:39 PM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
> >
> > My main desktop just had a reboot failure - it just got stuck at the
> > end, not powering down, and not rebooting like it should have.
>
> Ok, it doesn't see
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:23:22PM +0400, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
> > Pid: 887, comm: trinity-child2 Not tainted 3.8.0+ #57 Gigabyte Technology
> > Co., Ltd. GA-MA78GM-S2H/GA-MA78GM-S2H
> > RIP: 0010:[] [] do_msgrcv+0x22a/0x670
> > ...
> > Looks like Stanislav recently changed this code
We had two users report hitting a bug that looks like this..
general protection fault: 8800 [#1] SMP
PM: Restoring platform NVS memory
Modules linked in: fuse ipt_MASQUERADE nf_conntrack_netbios_ns
nf_conntrack_broadcast ip6table_mangle ip6t_REJECT nf_conntrack_ipv6
nf_defrag_ipv6 iptable_nat n
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 08:42:46PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 02:28:26 PM Dave Jones wrote:
> > We had two users report hitting a bug that looks like this..
> >
> > general protection fault: 8800 [#1] SMP
> >
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 10:40:10AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> USB patches for 3.9-rc1
>
> Here's the big USB merge for 3.9-rc1
>
> Nothing major, lots of gadget fixes, and of course, xhci stuff.
I get no USB devices recognised when I insert them any more, which
I think is pretty major. I sus
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 05:51:10PM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote:
> > > Nothing major, lots of gadget fixes, and of course, xhci stuff.
> >
> > I get no USB devices recognised when I insert them any more, which
> > I think is pretty major. I suspect it has something to do with this ?
> >
> >
Just hit this on Linus' current tree.
[ 1789.629729] =
[ 1789.629731] [ INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected ]
[ 1789.629736] 3.8.0+ #76 Not tainted
[ 1789.629738] -
[ 1
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 01:02:11AM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote:
> > > > What can I do to debug this ?
> > >Can you attach the output of dmesg with CONFIG_USB_DEBUG?
> >
> > http://paste.fedoraproject.org/3620
> How about"sudo lsusb -s 1:1 -v" or "2:1"?
(12:13:51:davej@t430s:~)$ sudo
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 01:17:42AM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote:
> On 2013/2/23 1:14, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 01:02:11AM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote:
> >
> > > > > > What can I do to debug this ?
> > > > > Can you
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:51:58PM +0100, Fabio Baltieri wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 03:59:54AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 10:40:10AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > It looks like every port on my laptop is powered down, as I can't
>
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 07:43:53PM +, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 08:31:50AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > Probably not missing anything subtle. I think all of this code is very
> > old, and related to previous /proc//fd/ escapades. And the
> > semantics for those files
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 03:02:36PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 15:03:22 -0400 Peter Hurley
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 14:26 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > > > {
> > >
> > > I just hit this aga
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 07:51:46AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 04:01:41PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
>
> [ . . . ]
>
> > > This way, "ptr" is executed exactly once, and the check and the
> > > hlist_entry() are both using the same value.
> >
> > I just played wit
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 09:58:31PM +0100, Toralf Förster wrote:
> On 03/14/2013 09:51 PM, richard -rw- weinberger wrote:
> > Can you please re-run with the attached patch.
> > I'm wondering how much memory is requested.
> >>From reading the source I'd say it must be less than PAGE_SIZE.
> > Bu
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 03:02:36PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 15:03:22 -0400 Peter Hurley
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 14:26 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > > > {
> > >
> > > I just hit this aga
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 10:10:48AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > This config item has not carried much meaning for a while now and is
> > almost always enabled by default. Remove it and adjust various config
> > logic and documentation.
>
Asking for this option on x86 seems a bit pointless.
Signed-off-by: Dave Jones
diff --git a/crypto/Kconfig b/crypto/Kconfig
index 94f232f..957cc56 100644
--- a/crypto/Kconfig
+++ b/crypto/Kconfig
@@ -796,6 +796,7 @@ config CRYPTO_DES
config CRYPTO_DES_SPARC64
tristate "DES and T
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 07:46:18PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > it in the kernel tree, unless we wanted people to use the option?
>
> A solution could be to add that option under CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL and specify
> that it must only be enabled by developers for specific reasons (overhea
> We have CONFIG_RCU_USER_QS that is a specific case. It's an intermediate
> state
> before we implement a true CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL. But the option is useless on
> its
> own for users. Worse, it introduces a real overhead. OTOH we want it to be
> upstream
> to make the development of full t
After linking, I see this..
ERROR: "virtqueue_kick" [net/9p/9pnet_virtio.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "virtqueue_get_buf" [net/9p/9pnet_virtio.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "virtqueue_add_buf" [net/9p/9pnet_virtio.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "virtqueue_notify" [drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "virtqueue
On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 02:36:19PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 10:41:06AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > We have CONFIG_RCU_USER_QS that is a specific case. It's an
> > intermediate state
> > > before we implement a true CONF
On boot in Linus' current tree..
===
[ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ]
3.6.0+ #22 Not tainted
---
include/linux/cgroup.h:566 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
other info that might help us debug this:
rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug
Takashi,
I've been seeing this on one machine since around 3.3 (perhaps earlier, I
forget)
I reported it a while ago, and you had me test some patch that didn't make any
difference, then it fell off my radar..
Dave
=
[ INFO: possible recursive
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 02:49:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Not sure why this suddenly got a lot worse in 3.7
>
> Did we add a static array of structures with locks in somewhere? Doing
> that is a great way of blowing up the number of lock classes and the
> resulting amount of lock
ezusb: module license 'unspecified' taints kernel
Signed-off-by: Dave Jones
diff --git a/drivers/usb/misc/ezusb.c b/drivers/usb/misc/ezusb.c
index 4223d76..6589268 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/misc/ezusb.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/misc/ezusb.c
@@ -158,3 +158,4 @@ int ezusb_fx2_ihex_firmwar
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:17:23PM -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > Some patches remove "(EXPERIMENTAL)" from Kconfig titles when there was
> > no "depends on EXPERIMENTAL". I've removed the cases of these where I
>
> Hm, I was under the impression that taskstats are not quite trusted yet,
> b
I've been able to trigger this for the last week or so.
Unclear whether this is a new bug, or my fuzzer got smarter, but I see the
pi-futex code hasn't changed since the last time it found something..
> BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0018
> IP: [] __lock_acq
Machine under significant load (4gb memory used, swap usage fluctuating)
triggered this...
WARNING: at mm/shmem.c:1151 shmem_getpage_gfp+0xa5c/0xa70()
Pid: 29795, comm: trinity-child4 Not tainted 3.7.0-rc2+ #49
Call Trace:
[] warn_slowpath_common+0x7f/0xc0
[] warn_slowpath_null+0x1a/0x20
[] shm
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 09:44:07PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>
>
> On 10/24/2012 01:24 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> > I've been able to trigger this for the last week or so.
> > Unclear whether this is a new bug, or my fuzzer got smarter, but I see the
> > pi-fut
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 09:36:27PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > 1148 error = shmem_add_to_page_cache(page,
> > mapping, index,
> > 1149 gfp,
> > swp_to_radix_entry(swap));
> > 1150 /* We alread
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 08:21:03PM +0100, Petr Titěra wrote:
> Hello,
>
> is there some reason for printing current voltage and multiplier of
> processor after each change? This change was added by commit 553ae38c.
> If this required for some reason can be this output changed to use
>
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 09:36:27PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2012, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> > Machine under significant load (4gb memory used, swap usage fluctuating)
> > triggered this...
> >
> > WARNING: at mm/shmem.c:1151 shmem_getpage_gfp
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 04:03:40PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > I just noticed we had a user report hitting this same warning, but
> > with a different trace..
> >
> > : [] warn_slowpath_common+0x7f/0xc0
> > : [] warn_slowpath_null+0x1a/0x20
> > : [] shmem_getpage_gfp+0x7f3/0x830
> > : []
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 04:48:41PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 04:03:40PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > >
> > > Except... earlier in the thread you explained how you hacked
> > >
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 04:36:13PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> Linus tree as of 5fecc9d8f59e765c2a48379dd7c6f5cf88c7d75a
>
> Dave
>
> ==
> [ INFO: HARDIRQ-safe -> HARDIRQ-unsafe lock order detected ]
>
PWM Support (PWM) [N/y/?] (NEW) ?
CONFIG_PWM:
This enables PWM support through the generic PWM framework.
Well that's.. enlightening. I'm picking on PWM here, but this isn't an
isolated case. Every merge window we see a slew of new options with useless
help texts. They may as well be non-exis
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 07:07:41PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:16:00AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > PWM Support (PWM) [N/y/?] (NEW) ?
> >
> > CONFIG_PWM:
> >
> > This enables PWM support through the generic PWM
Since 3.5, I've started noticing weird things happening with signal delivery.
Things I've seen so far..
- long running tasks SIGINT, even though I wasn't even anywhere near the
keyboard.
- processes running inside screen/tmux disappearing (and taking the whole
session with them).
And now, while
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:36:20PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 11:39 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Al? Please look into this. I'm not entirely sure what's going on, but
> > lockdep complains about this:
> >
> > Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:
> >
>
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 12:43:04PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Supervisor Mode Access Prevention (SMAP) is a new security feature
> disclosed by Intel in revision 014 of the Intel® Architecture
> Instruction Set Extensions Programming Reference:
>
> http://software.intel.com/sites/default/
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:44:11AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2012/10/25 Sergey Senozhatsky :
> > On (10/25/12 09:06), Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> >> > My understanding is (I may be wrong) that we can schedule() from
> >> >> > ptrace chain to
> >> >> > some arbitrary task, which
Another day, another rcu backtrace..
This says rc6, but it's pretty darn close to rc7, I think it was running
a build from Friday.
[260431.854524] ===
[260431.855485] [ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ]
[260431.856437] 3.11.0-rc6+ #12 Not tainted
[260431.857377] ---
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 01:30:41PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 10:58:38AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > Another day, another rcu backtrace..
> > > This says rc6, but it's pretty darn close to rc7, I think it was running
> > >
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 02:18:14PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 13:50:12 -0400
> Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > This was triggered as a regular user fwiw.
> > I had not been running perf, or any other tracing. It was just left
> > fu
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:45:53AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > It actually seems worse, seems I can trigger it even easier now, as if
> > there's a leak.
> >
> Can you please try the n
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 01:43:15PM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> On 8/26/13 12:29 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 02:18:14PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 13:50:12 -0400
> > > Dave Jones wrote:
> > > >
&g
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:18:46AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 03:08:22PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:45:53AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > &g
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 01:37:54AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:42:03AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 04:37:02PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > Try adding the -C64 to the invocation in scripts/test-m
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 01:49:40AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 05:42:44PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, for reproducing this bug, I'd stick to running it as a user, without
> > --dangerous.
> > you might still hit a fe
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 03:08:45PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > That said, google does find "swap_free: Unused swap offset entry"
> > reports from over the years. Most of them seem to be single-bit
> > errors, though (ie when the entry is 0100 or similar I'm more
> > inclined to blame a
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 07:58:12AM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> On 8/27/13 7:10 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 15:49:24 -0400
> > Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> >
> >> > Do you have /sys/kernel/debug with access permissions?
> &g
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:37:18PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 06:28:33PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > I've not tried matching up bits with Dave's reports, and just going
> > > into a meeting now, but this
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 8961 at kernel/trace/ftrace.c:1640
__ftrace_hash_rec_update.part.37+0x20a/0x240()
Modules linked in: bridge stp fuse hidp bnep rfcomm nfnetlink ipt_ULOG
scsi_transport_iscsi can_bcm nfc caif_socket caif af_802154 phonet af_rxrpc
bluetooth rfkill can_raw can llc2 pppoe pppox
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:31:01AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Dave,
>
> BTW, is there a way to run trinity on a subset of syscalls. Basically,
> I would like to run it on just the perf code, and nothing else. I have
> a feeling that the bug you see is not caused by other operations
> hap
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:57:01PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Dave, I'm assuming that trinidy does things as threads, such that it
> may be two threads calling perf with the same descriptor, and if we
> don't have the proper locks, things can get bad, right?
>
close. It does use as many
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 11:17:46AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Dave, can you add this patch to your kernels you test, and that way,
> the next time you hit this error, I want to see if this warning was
> triggered too.
>
> If we did not unregister the ftrace ops but free the filters, it
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 02:27:10PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 11:17:46AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> > Dave, can you add this patch to your kernels you test, and that way,
> > the next time you hit this error, I want to see if this warning w
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 09:40:33AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 08:53:35PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 09:49:27PM -0400, David Airlie wrote:
> > >
> > > > Reading /proc/dri/0/vma causes bad things to happ
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 06:35:22AM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 09:40:33AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 08:53:35PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > > On M
I seem to recall hitting this quite a while ago. Does it look familiar ?
Either it didn't get fixed, or it's back..
Dave
[ 2836.628351] ==
[ 2836.628392] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
[ 2836.628436] 3.12.0-rc3+
Grouping them by vendor should make it easier to spot duplicates.
Signed-off-by: Dave Jones
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c
index d9333a4..7692520 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c
@@ -136,236 +136,248 @@ static int __init
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 08:28:51AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-01 at 00:20 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> > It seems like trace-cmd needs to be run as root. all hell will break loose
> > if trinity gets root privs.
>
> Then run this:
>
> t
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:43:26PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > I keep hititng that other ftrace bug instead:
> >
> > WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 15596 at kernel/trace/ftrace.c:1701
> > ftrace_bug+0x206/0x270()
> > Modules linked in: snd_seq_dummy(+) rfcomm hidp bnep nfnetlink
> > scsi_tran
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 10:38:01PM +0400, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I am working on AddressSanitizer -- a tool that detects use-after-free
> and out-of-bounds bugs
> (https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/AddressSanitizerForKernel).
> Below is one of the bug reports that I
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 04:18:02PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 14:57 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> > And that's the cause. I wonder what was being opened.
> > Do you happen to have a trinity-child log for that thread ?
>
> Thanks fo
==
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
3.12.0-rc3+ #92 Not tainted
---
trinity-child2/15191 is trying to acquire lock:
(&rdp->nocb_wq){..}, at: [] __wake_up+0x23/0x
On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 04:36:10PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Monday, September 30, 2013 05:13:42 PM Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 01:37:53PM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> > > > With that patch applied, the problem seems to have moved elsewhere..
WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 26128 at fs/attr.c:178 notify_change+0x34d/0x360()
Modules linked in: dlci 8021q garp sctp snd_seq_dummy bridge stp tun fuse
rfcomm hidp ipt_ULOG nfc caif_socket caif af_802154 phonet af_rxrpc bnep
bluetooth rfkill can_bcm can_raw can llc2 pppoe pppox ppp_generic slhc irda
c
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:35:27PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running latest -next,
> I've
> stumbled on the following spew:
>
> [ 2536.440007] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 23s!
> [trinity-child86:12368]
> [ 2536.44
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:49:29PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 07/09/2013 06:47 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > [ 2536.500130] INFO: NMI handler
> > (arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace_handler) took too long to run:
> > > 697182.008 msecs
> >
> > I&#x
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 09:51:32PM -0400, Michael L. Semon wrote:
> kernel: [ 2580.395592] vmap allocation for size 20480 failed: use
> vmalloc= to increase size.
> kernel: [ 2580.395761] vmalloc: allocation failure: 16384 bytes
I was seeing a lot of these recently too.
(Though I also saw mem
On Sat, Jul 06, 2013 at 09:24:08AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Dave Jones wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 05:15:07PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Fri, 5 Jul 2013, Dave Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > > BUG: soft lockup
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 05:20:15PM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2013.07.10 at 11:13 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > I get this right after booting..
> >
> > [ 114.516619] perf samples too long (4262 > 2500), lowering
> > kernel.perf_event_max_sampl
1 - 100 of 2273 matches
Mail list logo
