Re: 回复：regression caused by patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413?? ("dax: fix detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block?? devices")
On Tue 15-09-20 12:49:10, Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 1:01 AM Jan Kara wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > On Tue 15-09-20 11:03:29, col...@suse.de wrote: > > > Could you please to take a look? I am offline in the next two weeks. > > > > I just had a look into this. IMHO the justification in 6180bb446a "dax: fix > > detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block devices" is just > > bogus and people got confused by the previous condition > > > > if (!dax_dev && !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize)) > > > > which was bogus as well. bdev_dax_supported() always returns false for bdev > > that doesn't have dax_dev (naturally so). So in the original condition > > there was no point in calling bdev_dax_supported() if we know dax_dev is > > NULL. > > > > Then this was changed to: > > > > if (!dax_dev || !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize)) > > > > which looks more sensible at the first sight. But only at the first sight - > > if you look at wider context, __generic_fsdax_supported() is the bulk of > > code that decides whether a device supports DAX so calling > > bdev_dax_supported() from it indeed doesn't look as such a great idea. So > > IMO the condition should be just: > > > > if (!dax_dev) > > > > I'll send a fix for this. > > If you beat me to it, great, but you might be sleeping now. I agree > the original condition was bogus and looks to be a result of previous > non-thorough refactoring on my part. I think we can move that !dax_dev > into dax_supported(). I'll take a look. Adrian actually already submitted a fix here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nvdimm/20200915075729.12518-1-adrianhuang0...@gmail.com/ so we're now refining the fix in that thread. Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR ___ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-le...@lists.01.org
Re: 回复：regression caused by patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413?? ("dax: fix detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block?? devices")
On Tue 15-09-20 15:12:21, Verma, Vishal L wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-09-15 at 10:01 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > On Tue 15-09-20 11:03:29, col...@suse.de wrote:
> > > Could you please to take a look? I am offline in the next two weeks.
> >
> > I just had a look into this. IMHO the justification in 6180bb446a "dax: fix
> > detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block devices" is just
> > bogus and people got confused by the previous condition
> >
> > if (!dax_dev && !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize))
> >
> > which was bogus as well. bdev_dax_supported() always returns false for bdev
> > that doesn't have dax_dev (naturally so). So in the original condition
> > there was no point in calling bdev_dax_supported() if we know dax_dev is
> > NULL.
> >
> > Then this was changed to:
> >
> > if (!dax_dev || !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize))
> >
> > which looks more sensible at the first sight. But only at the first sight -
> > if you look at wider context, __generic_fsdax_supported() is the bulk of
> > code that decides whether a device supports DAX so calling
> > bdev_dax_supported() from it indeed doesn't look as such a great idea. So
> > IMO the condition should be just:
> >
> > if (!dax_dev)
> >
> > I'll send a fix for this.
> >
> > Also there's the process question how this patch could get to Linus when
> > any attempt to use DAX would immediately kill the machine like Mikulas
> > spotted. This shows the that patch was untested with DAX by anybody on the
> > path from the developer to Linus...
>
> This was entirely my fault, and I apologize. I got confused as to what
> state my branches were in, and I thought this had cleared our unit tests
> etc, when it obviously hadn't. I'm going to take a harder look at my
> personal branch/patch management process to make sure it doesn't happen
> again!
No worries. Bugs happen and this was still caught rather early without real
harm caused... I was just ranting to make sure testing does happen in the
future :)
Honza
> > > 原始邮件
> > > 发件人： Mikulas Patocka
> > > 日期： 2020年9月14日周一半夜11:48
> > > 收件人： Coly Li , Dan Williams ,
> > > Dave Jiang
> > > 抄送： Jan Kara , Vishal Verma ,
> > > Adrian Huang , Ira Weiny , Mike
> > > Snitzer , Pankaj Gupta ,
> > > linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
> > > 主题： regression caused by patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413
> > > ("dax: fix detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block
> > > devices")
> > >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > The patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413 ("dax: fix
> > > detection of
> > > dax support for non-persistent memory block devices") causes crash
> > > when
> > > attempting to mount the ext4 filesystem on /dev/pmem0 ("mkfs.ext4
> > > /dev/pmem0; mount -t ext4 /dev/pmem0 /mnt/test"). The device
> > > /dev/pmem0 is
> > > emulated using the "memmap" kernel parameter.
> > >
> > > The patch causes infinite recursion and double-fault exception:
> > >
> > > __generic_fsdax_supported
> > > bdev_dax_supported
> > > __bdev_dax_supported
> > > dax_supported
> > > dax_dev->ops->dax_supported
> > > generic_fsdax_supported
> > > __generic_fsdax_supported
> > >
> > > Mikulas
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [ 17.500619] traps: PANIC: double fault, error_code: 0x0
> > > [ 17.500619] double fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
> > > [ 17.500620] CPU: 0 PID: 1326 Comm: mount Not tainted
> > > 5.9.0-rc1-bisect #
> > > 10
> > > [ 17.500620] Hardware name: Bochs Bochs, BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011
> > > [ 17.500621] RIP: 0010:__generic_fsdax_supported+0x6a/0x500
> > > [ 17.500622] Code: ff ff ff ff ff 7f 00 48 21 f3 48 01 c3 48 c1 e3
> > > 09 f6
> > > c7 0e 0f 85 fa 01 00 00 48 85 ff 49 89 fd 74 11 be 00 10 00 00 4c 89
> > > e7
> > > b1 fe ff ff 84 c0 75 11 31 c0 48 83 c4 48 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41
> > > [ 17.500623] RSP: 0018:88940b4fdff8 EFLAGS: 00010286
> > > [ 17.500624] RAX: RBX: 0007f000 RCX:
> > >
> > > [ 17.500625] RDX: 1000 RSI: 1000 RDI:
> > > 88940b34c300
> > > [ 17.500625] RBP: R08: 0400 R09:
> > > 8080808080808080
> > > [ 17.500626] R10: R11: fefefefefefefeff R12:
> > > 88940b34c300
> > > [ 17.500626] R13: 88940b3dc000 R14: 88940badd000 R15:
> > > 0001
> > > [ 17.500627] FS: f7c25780() GS:88940fa0()
> > > knlGS:
> > > [ 17.500628] CS: 0010 DS: 002b ES: 002b CR0: 80050033
> > > [ 17.500628] CR2: 88940b4fdfe8 CR3: 00140bd15000 CR4:
> > > 06b0
> > > [ 17.500628] Call Trace:
> > > [ 17.500629] Modules linked in: uvesafb cfbfillrect cfbimgblt cn
> > > cfbcopyarea fb fbdev ipv6 tun autofs4 binfmt_misc
Re: 回复：regression caused by patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413?? ("dax: fix detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block?? devices")
On Tue, Sep 15 2020 at 3:49pm -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 1:01 AM Jan Kara wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > On Tue 15-09-20 11:03:29, col...@suse.de wrote: > > > Could you please to take a look? I am offline in the next two weeks. > > > > I just had a look into this. IMHO the justification in 6180bb446a "dax: fix > > detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block devices" is just > > bogus and people got confused by the previous condition > > > > if (!dax_dev && !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize)) > > > > which was bogus as well. bdev_dax_supported() always returns false for bdev > > that doesn't have dax_dev (naturally so). So in the original condition > > there was no point in calling bdev_dax_supported() if we know dax_dev is > > NULL. > > > > Then this was changed to: > > > > if (!dax_dev || !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize)) > > > > which looks more sensible at the first sight. But only at the first sight - > > if you look at wider context, __generic_fsdax_supported() is the bulk of > > code that decides whether a device supports DAX so calling > > bdev_dax_supported() from it indeed doesn't look as such a great idea. So > > IMO the condition should be just: > > > > if (!dax_dev) > > > > I'll send a fix for this. > > If you beat me to it, great, but you might be sleeping now. I agree > the original condition was bogus and looks to be a result of previous > non-thorough refactoring on my part. I think we can move that !dax_dev > into dax_supported(). I'll take a look. You trimmed the relevant portion of Jan's reply but: can you also weigh-in one whether DM is using the wrong function to test for DAX? Mike ___ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-le...@lists.01.org
Re: 回复：regression caused by patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413?? ("dax: fix detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block?? devices")
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 1:01 AM Jan Kara wrote: > > Hi! > > On Tue 15-09-20 11:03:29, col...@suse.de wrote: > > Could you please to take a look? I am offline in the next two weeks. > > I just had a look into this. IMHO the justification in 6180bb446a "dax: fix > detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block devices" is just > bogus and people got confused by the previous condition > > if (!dax_dev && !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize)) > > which was bogus as well. bdev_dax_supported() always returns false for bdev > that doesn't have dax_dev (naturally so). So in the original condition > there was no point in calling bdev_dax_supported() if we know dax_dev is > NULL. > > Then this was changed to: > > if (!dax_dev || !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize)) > > which looks more sensible at the first sight. But only at the first sight - > if you look at wider context, __generic_fsdax_supported() is the bulk of > code that decides whether a device supports DAX so calling > bdev_dax_supported() from it indeed doesn't look as such a great idea. So > IMO the condition should be just: > > if (!dax_dev) > > I'll send a fix for this. If you beat me to it, great, but you might be sleeping now. I agree the original condition was bogus and looks to be a result of previous non-thorough refactoring on my part. I think we can move that !dax_dev into dax_supported(). I'll take a look. ___ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-le...@lists.01.org
Re: 回复：regression caused by patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413?? ("dax: fix detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block?? devices")
On Tue, 2020-09-15 at 10:01 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Tue 15-09-20 11:03:29, col...@suse.de wrote:
> > Could you please to take a look? I am offline in the next two weeks.
>
> I just had a look into this. IMHO the justification in 6180bb446a "dax: fix
> detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block devices" is just
> bogus and people got confused by the previous condition
>
> if (!dax_dev && !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize))
>
> which was bogus as well. bdev_dax_supported() always returns false for bdev
> that doesn't have dax_dev (naturally so). So in the original condition
> there was no point in calling bdev_dax_supported() if we know dax_dev is
> NULL.
>
> Then this was changed to:
>
> if (!dax_dev || !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize))
>
> which looks more sensible at the first sight. But only at the first sight -
> if you look at wider context, __generic_fsdax_supported() is the bulk of
> code that decides whether a device supports DAX so calling
> bdev_dax_supported() from it indeed doesn't look as such a great idea. So
> IMO the condition should be just:
>
> if (!dax_dev)
>
> I'll send a fix for this.
>
> Also there's the process question how this patch could get to Linus when
> any attempt to use DAX would immediately kill the machine like Mikulas
> spotted. This shows the that patch was untested with DAX by anybody on the
> path from the developer to Linus...
Hi Jan,
This was entirely my fault, and I apologize. I got confused as to what
state my branches were in, and I thought this had cleared our unit tests
etc, when it obviously hadn't. I'm going to take a harder look at my
personal branch/patch management process to make sure it doesn't happen
again!
Thanks for taking a look.
-Vishal
>
> Honza
>
> > 原始邮件
> > 发件人： Mikulas Patocka
> > 日期： 2020年9月14日周一半夜11:48
> > 收件人： Coly Li , Dan Williams ,
> > Dave Jiang
> > 抄送： Jan Kara , Vishal Verma ,
> > Adrian Huang , Ira Weiny , Mike
> > Snitzer , Pankaj Gupta ,
> > linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
> > 主题： regression caused by patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413
> > ("dax: fix detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block
> > devices")
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > The patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413 ("dax: fix detection
> > of
> > dax support for non-persistent memory block devices") causes crash when
> > attempting to mount the ext4 filesystem on /dev/pmem0 ("mkfs.ext4
> > /dev/pmem0; mount -t ext4 /dev/pmem0 /mnt/test"). The device /dev/pmem0
> > is
> > emulated using the "memmap" kernel parameter.
> >
> > The patch causes infinite recursion and double-fault exception:
> >
> > __generic_fsdax_supported
> > bdev_dax_supported
> > __bdev_dax_supported
> > dax_supported
> > dax_dev->ops->dax_supported
> > generic_fsdax_supported
> > __generic_fsdax_supported
> >
> > Mikulas
> >
> >
> >
> > [ 17.500619] traps: PANIC: double fault, error_code: 0x0
> > [ 17.500619] double fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
> > [ 17.500620] CPU: 0 PID: 1326 Comm: mount Not tainted
> > 5.9.0-rc1-bisect #
> > 10
> > [ 17.500620] Hardware name: Bochs Bochs, BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011
> > [ 17.500621] RIP: 0010:__generic_fsdax_supported+0x6a/0x500
> > [ 17.500622] Code: ff ff ff ff ff 7f 00 48 21 f3 48 01 c3 48 c1 e3 09
> > f6
> > c7 0e 0f 85 fa 01 00 00 48 85 ff 49 89 fd 74 11 be 00 10 00 00 4c 89 e7
> > b1 fe ff ff 84 c0 75 11 31 c0 48 83 c4 48 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41
> > [ 17.500623] RSP: 0018:88940b4fdff8 EFLAGS: 00010286
> > [ 17.500624] RAX: RBX: 0007f000 RCX:
> >
> > [ 17.500625] RDX: 1000 RSI: 1000 RDI:
> > 88940b34c300
> > [ 17.500625] RBP: R08: 0400 R09:
> > 8080808080808080
> > [ 17.500626] R10: R11: fefefefefefefeff R12:
> > 88940b34c300
> > [ 17.500626] R13: 88940b3dc000 R14: 88940badd000 R15:
> > 0001
> > [ 17.500627] FS: f7c25780() GS:88940fa0()
> > knlGS:
> > [ 17.500628] CS: 0010 DS: 002b ES: 002b CR0: 80050033
> > [ 17.500628] CR2: 88940b4fdfe8 CR3: 00140bd15000 CR4:
> > 06b0
> > [ 17.500628] Call Trace:
> > [ 17.500629] Modules linked in: uvesafb cfbfillrect cfbimgblt cn
> > cfbcopyarea fb fbdev ipv6 tun autofs4 binfmt_misc configfs af_packet
> > virtio_rng rng_core mousedev evdev pcspkr virtio_balloon button raid10
> > raid456 async_raid6_recov async_memcpy async_pq raid6_pq async_xor xor
> > async_tx libcrc32c raid1 raid0 md_mod sd_mod t10_pi virtio_scsi
> > virtio_net
> > net_failover psmouse scsi_mod failover
> > [ 17.500638] ---[ end trace 3c877fcb5b865459 ]---
> > [
Re: 回复：regression caused by patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413?? ("dax: fix detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block?? devices")
Hi!
On Tue 15-09-20 11:03:29, col...@suse.de wrote:
> Could you please to take a look? I am offline in the next two weeks.
I just had a look into this. IMHO the justification in 6180bb446a "dax: fix
detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block devices" is just
bogus and people got confused by the previous condition
if (!dax_dev && !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize))
which was bogus as well. bdev_dax_supported() always returns false for bdev
that doesn't have dax_dev (naturally so). So in the original condition
there was no point in calling bdev_dax_supported() if we know dax_dev is
NULL.
Then this was changed to:
if (!dax_dev || !bdev_dax_supported(bdev, blocksize))
which looks more sensible at the first sight. But only at the first sight -
if you look at wider context, __generic_fsdax_supported() is the bulk of
code that decides whether a device supports DAX so calling
bdev_dax_supported() from it indeed doesn't look as such a great idea. So
IMO the condition should be just:
if (!dax_dev)
I'll send a fix for this.
Also there's the process question how this patch could get to Linus when
any attempt to use DAX would immediately kill the machine like Mikulas
spotted. This shows the that patch was untested with DAX by anybody on the
path from the developer to Linus...
Honza
> 原始邮件
> 发件人： Mikulas Patocka
> 日期： 2020年9月14日周一半夜11:48
> 收件人： Coly Li , Dan Williams ,
> Dave Jiang
> 抄送： Jan Kara , Vishal Verma ,
> Adrian Huang , Ira Weiny , Mike
> Snitzer , Pankaj Gupta ,
> linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
> 主题： regression caused by patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413
> ("dax: fix detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block
> devices")
>
> Hi
>
> The patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413 ("dax: fix detection of
> dax support for non-persistent memory block devices") causes crash when
> attempting to mount the ext4 filesystem on /dev/pmem0 ("mkfs.ext4
> /dev/pmem0; mount -t ext4 /dev/pmem0 /mnt/test"). The device /dev/pmem0 is
> emulated using the "memmap" kernel parameter.
>
> The patch causes infinite recursion and double-fault exception:
>
> __generic_fsdax_supported
> bdev_dax_supported
> __bdev_dax_supported
> dax_supported
> dax_dev->ops->dax_supported
> generic_fsdax_supported
> __generic_fsdax_supported
>
> Mikulas
>
>
>
> [ 17.500619] traps: PANIC: double fault, error_code: 0x0
> [ 17.500619] double fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
> [ 17.500620] CPU: 0 PID: 1326 Comm: mount Not tainted 5.9.0-rc1-bisect #
> 10
> [ 17.500620] Hardware name: Bochs Bochs, BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011
> [ 17.500621] RIP: 0010:__generic_fsdax_supported+0x6a/0x500
> [ 17.500622] Code: ff ff ff ff ff 7f 00 48 21 f3 48 01 c3 48 c1 e3 09 f6
> c7 0e 0f 85 fa 01 00 00 48 85 ff 49 89 fd 74 11 be 00 10 00 00 4c 89 e7
> b1 fe ff ff 84 c0 75 11 31 c0 48 83 c4 48 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41
> [ 17.500623] RSP: 0018:88940b4fdff8 EFLAGS: 00010286
> [ 17.500624] RAX: RBX: 0007f000 RCX:
>
> [ 17.500625] RDX: 1000 RSI: 1000 RDI:
> 88940b34c300
> [ 17.500625] RBP: R08: 0400 R09:
> 8080808080808080
> [ 17.500626] R10: R11: fefefefefefefeff R12:
> 88940b34c300
> [ 17.500626] R13: 88940b3dc000 R14: 88940badd000 R15:
> 0001
> [ 17.500627] FS: f7c25780() GS:88940fa0()
> knlGS:
> [ 17.500628] CS: 0010 DS: 002b ES: 002b CR0: 80050033
> [ 17.500628] CR2: 88940b4fdfe8 CR3: 00140bd15000 CR4:
> 06b0
> [ 17.500628] Call Trace:
> [ 17.500629] Modules linked in: uvesafb cfbfillrect cfbimgblt cn
> cfbcopyarea fb fbdev ipv6 tun autofs4 binfmt_misc configfs af_packet
> virtio_rng rng_core mousedev evdev pcspkr virtio_balloon button raid10
> raid456 async_raid6_recov async_memcpy async_pq raid6_pq async_xor xor
> async_tx libcrc32c raid1 raid0 md_mod sd_mod t10_pi virtio_scsi virtio_net
> net_failover psmouse scsi_mod failover
> [ 17.500638] ---[ end trace 3c877fcb5b865459 ]---
> [ 17.500638] RIP: 0010:__generic_fsdax_supported+0x6a/0x500
> [ 17.500639] Code: ff ff ff ff ff 7f 00 48 21 f3 48 01 c3 48 c1 e3 09 f6
> c7 0e 0f 85 fa 01 00 00 48 85 ff 49 89 fd 74 11 be 00 10 00 00 4c 89 e7
> b1 fe ff ff 84 c0 75 11 31 c0 48 83 c4 48 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41
> [ 17.500640] RSP: 0018:88940b4fdff8 EFLAGS: 00010286
> [ 17.500641] RAX: RBX: 0007f000 RCX:
>
> [ 17.500641] RDX: 1000 RSI: 1000 RDI:
> 88940b34c300
> [ 17.500642] RBP: R08: 0400 R09:
> 8080808080808080
回复：regression caused by patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413 ("dax: fix detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block devices")
Hi Andrian, Could you please to take a look? I am offline in the next two weeks. Thanks in advance. Coly Li 原始邮件 发件人： Mikulas Patocka 日期： 2020年9月14日周一 半夜11:48收件人： Coly Li , Dan Williams , Dave Jiang 抄送： Jan Kara , Vishal Verma , Adrian Huang , Ira Weiny , Mike Snitzer , Pankaj Gupta , linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org主题： regression caused by patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413 ("dax: fix detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block devices")HiThe patch 6180bb446ab624b9ab8bf201ed251ca87f07b413 ("dax: fix detection of dax support for non-persistent memory block devices") causes crash when attempting to mount the ext4 filesystem on /dev/pmem0 ("mkfs.ext4 /dev/pmem0; mount -t ext4 /dev/pmem0 /mnt/test"). The device /dev/pmem0 is emulated using the "memmap" kernel parameter.The patch causes infinite recursion and double-fault exception:__generic_fsdax_supportedbdev_dax_supported__bdev_dax_supporteddax_supporteddax_dev->ops->dax_supportedgeneric_fsdax_supported__generic_fsdax_supportedMikulas[ 17.500619] traps: PANIC: double fault, error_code: 0x0[ 17.500619] double fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP[ 17.500620] CPU: 0 PID: 1326 Comm: mount Not tainted 5.9.0-rc1-bisect #10[ 17.500620] Hardware name: Bochs Bochs, BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011[ 17.500621] RIP: 0010:__generic_fsdax_supported+0x6a/0x500[ 17.500622] Code: ff ff ff ff ff 7f 00 48 21 f3 48 01 c3 48 c1 e3 09 f6 c7 0e 0f 85 fa 01 00 00 48 85 ff 49 89 fd 74 11 be 00 10 00 00 4c 89 e7 b1 fe ff ff 84 c0 75 11 31 c0 48 83 c4 48 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41[ 17.500623] RSP: 0018:88940b4fdff8 EFLAGS: 00010286[ 17.500624] RAX: RBX: 0007f000 RCX: [ 17.500625] RDX: 1000 RSI: 1000 RDI: 88940b34c300[ 17.500625] RBP: R08: 0400 R09: 8080808080808080[ 17.500626] R10: R11: fefefefefefefeff R12: 88940b34c300[ 17.500626] R13: 88940b3dc000 R14: 88940badd000 R15: 0001[ 17.500627] FS: f7c25780() GS:88940fa0() knlGS:[ 17.500628] CS: 0010 DS: 002b ES: 002b CR0: 80050033[ 17.500628] CR2: 88940b4fdfe8 CR3: 00140bd15000 CR4: 06b0[ 17.500628] Call Trace:[ 17.500629] Modules linked in: uvesafb cfbfillrect cfbimgblt cn cfbcopyarea fb fbdev ipv6 tun autofs4 binfmt_misc configfs af_packet virtio_rng rng_core mousedev evdev pcspkr virtio_balloon button raid10 raid456 async_raid6_recov async_memcpy async_pq raid6_pq async_xor xor async_tx libcrc32c raid1 raid0 md_mod sd_mod t10_pi virtio_scsi virtio_net net_failover psmouse scsi_mod failover[ 17.500638] ---[ end trace 3c877fcb5b865459 ]---[ 17.500638] RIP: 0010:__generic_fsdax_supported+0x6a/0x500[ 17.500639] Code: ff ff ff ff ff 7f 00 48 21 f3 48 01 c3 48 c1 e3 09 f6 c7 0e 0f 85 fa 01 00 00 48 85 ff 49 89 fd 74 11 be 00 10 00 00 4c 89 e7 b1 fe ff ff 84 c0 75 11 31 c0 48 83 c4 48 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41[ 17.500640] RSP: 0018:88940b4fdff8 EFLAGS: 00010286[ 17.500641] RAX: RBX: 0007f000 RCX: [ 17.500641] RDX: 1000 RSI: 1000 RDI: 88940b34c300[ 17.500642] RBP: R08: 0400 R09: 8080808080808080[ 17.500642] R10: R11: fefefefefefefeff R12: 88940b34c300[ 17.500643] R13: 88940b3dc000 R14: 88940badd000 R15: 0001[ 17.500643] FS: f7c25780() GS:88940fa0() knlGS:[ 17.500644] CS: 0010 DS: 002b ES: 002b CR0: 80050033[ 17.500644] CR2: 88940b4fdfe8 CR3: 00140bd15000 CR4: 06b0[ 17.500645] Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception in interrupt[ 17.500941] Kernel Offset: disabled___
Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-le...@lists.01.org
