[Non-DoD Source] 答复: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-18 Thread yangjihong
>On 12/15/2017 08:56 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: >> On Fri, 2017-12-15 at 03:09 +, yangjihong wrote: >>> On 12/15/2017 10:31 PM, yangjihong wrote: On 12/14/2017 12:42 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote: > On 12/14/2017 9:15 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: >> On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 09:00 -0800,

Re: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-15 Thread Daniel Walsh
On 12/15/2017 08:56 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: On Fri, 2017-12-15 at 03:09 +, yangjihong wrote: On 12/15/2017 10:31 PM, yangjihong wrote: On 12/14/2017 12:42 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote: On 12/14/2017 9:15 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 09:00 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote:

Re: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-15 Thread Stephen Smalley
On Fri, 2017-12-15 at 03:09 +, yangjihong wrote: > On 12/15/2017 10:31 PM, yangjihong wrote: > > On 12/14/2017 12:42 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > > On 12/14/2017 9:15 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 09:00 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > > > > On 12/14/2017 8:42 AM,

[Non-DoD Source] 答复: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-15 Thread yangjihong
On 12/15/2017 10:31 PM, yangjihong wrote: >On 12/14/2017 12:42 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote: >> On 12/14/2017 9:15 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: >>> On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 09:00 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote: On 12/14/2017 8:42 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 08:18 -0800, Casey

Re: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-14 Thread Daniel Walsh
On 12/14/2017 12:42 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote: On 12/14/2017 9:15 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 09:00 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote: On 12/14/2017 8:42 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 08:18 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote: On 12/13/2017 7:18 AM, Stephen

Re: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-14 Thread Casey Schaufler
On 12/14/2017 9:15 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 09:00 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote: >> On 12/14/2017 8:42 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: >>> On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 08:18 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote: On 12/13/2017 7:18 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > On Wed, 2017-12-13 at

Re: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-14 Thread Stephen Smalley
On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 09:00 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote: > On 12/14/2017 8:42 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 08:18 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > > On 12/13/2017 7:18 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 09:25 +, yangjihong wrote: > > > > > Hello, 

Re: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-14 Thread Casey Schaufler
On 12/14/2017 8:42 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 08:18 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote: >> On 12/13/2017 7:18 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: >>> On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 09:25 +, yangjihong wrote: Hello,  I am doing stressing testing on 3.10 kernel(centos 7.4), to

Re: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-14 Thread Stephen Smalley
On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 08:18 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote: > On 12/13/2017 7:18 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > > On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 09:25 +, yangjihong wrote: > > > Hello,  > > > > > > I am doing stressing testing on 3.10 kernel(centos 7.4), to > > > constantly starting numbers of docker

Re: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-14 Thread Casey Schaufler
On 12/13/2017 7:18 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 09:25 +, yangjihong wrote: >> Hello,  >> >> I am doing stressing testing on 3.10 kernel(centos 7.4), to >> constantly starting numbers of docker ontainers with selinux enabled, >> and after about 2 days, the kernel

Re: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-14 Thread Stephen Smalley
On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 03:19 +, yangjihong wrote: > Hello, > > >  So, does docker just keep allocating a unique category set for > > every new container, never reusing them even if the container is > > destroyed?  > >  That would be a bug in docker IMHO.  Or are you creating an > > unbounded

[Non-DoD Source] 答复: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-14 Thread yangjihong
Hello, > So, does docker just keep allocating a unique category set for every new > container, never reusing them even if the container is destroyed? > That would be a bug in docker IMHO. Or are you creating an unbounded number > of containers and never destroying the older ones? I creat a

Re: [BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-13 Thread Stephen Smalley
On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 09:25 +, yangjihong wrote: > Hello,  > > I am doing stressing testing on 3.10 kernel(centos 7.4), to > constantly starting numbers of docker ontainers with selinux enabled, > and after about 2 days, the kernel softlockup panic: >    [] sched_show_task+0xb8/0x120 >  []

[BUG]kernel softlockup due to sidtab_search_context run for long time because of too many sidtab context node

2017-12-13 Thread yangjihong
Hello, I am doing stressing testing on 3.10 kernel(centos 7.4), to constantly starting numbers of docker ontainers with selinux enabled, and after about 2 days, the kernel softlockup panic: [] sched_show_task+0xb8/0x120 [] show_lock_info+0x20f/0x3a0 [] watchdog_timer_fn+0x1da/0x2f0 [] ?