Hi, On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 02:20:04PM +0300, [email protected] wrote: > 24.01.2024 13:57, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > Oh wait, this is a 5.10 kernel ? > > Yes, but the bug is reproduced on the latest stable kernels. > > > Please generate a stack trace using a recent tree, it is possible the > > bug has been fixed already.
__netlink_dump_start() is called at the beginning of the dump, which is grabbing a reference on this module. do you have a reproducer? > See [PATCH 0/1] above, there's a stack for the 6.6.13 kernel at the bottom > of the message. > > [ 523.915255] Call Trace: > [ 523.915255] <TASK> > [ 523.915255] ? __die+0x1f/0x70 > [ 523.915255] ? page_fault_oops+0x14d/0x4a0 > [ 523.915255] ? exc_page_fault+0x7b/0x180 > [ 523.915255] ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x22/0x30 > [ 523.915255] ? gtp_genl_dump_pdp+0x82/0x190 [gtp] > [ 523.915255] ? gtp_genl_dump_pdp+0x82/0x190 [gtp] > [ 523.915255] genl_dumpit+0x2f/0x90 > [ 523.915255] netlink_dump+0x126/0x320 > [ 523.915255] __netlink_dump_start+0x1da/0x2a0 > [ 523.915255] genl_family_rcv_msg_dumpit+0x93/0x100 > [ 523.915255] ? __pfx_genl_start+0x10/0x10 > [ 523.915255] ? __pfx_genl_dumpit+0x10/0x10 > [ 523.915255] ? __pfx_genl_done+0x10/0x10 > [ 523.915255] genl_rcv_msg+0x112/0x2a0 > [ 523.915255] ? __pfx_gtp_genl_dump_pdp+0x10/0x10 [gtp] > [ 523.915255] ? __pfx_genl_rcv_msg+0x10/0x10 > [ 523.915255] netlink_rcv_skb+0x54/0x110 > [ 523.915255] genl_rcv+0x24/0x40 > [ 523.915255] netlink_unicast+0x19f/0x290 > [ 523.915255] netlink_sendmsg+0x250/0x4e0 > [ 523.915255] ____sys_sendmsg+0x376/0x3b0 > [ 523.915255] ? copy_msghdr_from_user+0x6d/0xb0 > [ 523.915255] ___sys_sendmsg+0x86/0xe0 > [ 523.915255] ? do_fault+0x296/0x470 > [ 523.915255] ? __handle_mm_fault+0x771/0xda0 > [ 523.915255] __sys_sendmsg+0x57/0xb0 > [ 523.915255] do_syscall_64+0x59/0x90 > [ 523.915255] ? ct_kernel_exit.isra.0+0x71/0x90 > [ 523.915255] ? __ct_user_enter+0x5a/0xd0 > [ 523.915255] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6e/0xd8 > [ 523.915255] RIP: 0033:0x7f2bcb93cd49 > > -- > Regards, > Vasiliy Kovalev >
