On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:34:40AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 03/19/2013 09:02 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > Hi Sasha,
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Sasha Levin
> > wrote:
> >> On 03/19/2013 07:54 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>
> >> With v3 of the patch:
> >>
> >> [ 1275.665758]
On 03/19/2013 09:02 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi Sasha,
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On 03/19/2013 07:54 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>
>> With v3 of the patch:
>>
>> [ 1275.665758] sysfs_dir_pos-973 sysfs_dirent use after free:
>> tun(tun)-uevent, 2-1472641949
>
> Thanks
On 03/19/2013 09:02 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
Hi Sasha,
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/19/2013 07:54 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
With v3 of the patch:
[ 1275.665758] sysfs_dir_pos-973 sysfs_dirent use after free:
tun(tun)-uevent, 2-1472641949
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:34:40AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
On 03/19/2013 09:02 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
Hi Sasha,
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 03/19/2013 07:54 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
With v3 of the patch:
[ 1275.665758]
Hi Sasha,
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 03/19/2013 07:54 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>
> With v3 of the patch:
>
> [ 1275.665758] sysfs_dir_pos-973 sysfs_dirent use after free:
> tun(tun)-uevent, 2-1472641949
Thanks again for your test.
Looks it is caused by another bug in
On 03/19/2013 07:54 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi Sasha,
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>> Hi Sasha,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Sasha Levin
>> wrote:
>>> [ 232.822703] sysfs_dir_pos-973 sysfs_dirent use after free:
>>> vx855(vx855)-bind, 0-25520352
>>
>> Looks
Hi Sasha,
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi Sasha,
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> [ 232.822703] sysfs_dir_pos-973 sysfs_dirent use after free:
>> vx855(vx855)-bind, 0-25520352
>
> Looks filp->f_pos is changed as zero by llseek(), so may leave
Hi Sasha,
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Ming Lei tom.leim...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Sasha,
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
[ 232.822703] sysfs_dir_pos-973 sysfs_dirent use after free:
vx855(vx855)-bind, 0-25520352
Looks filp-f_pos is changed
On 03/19/2013 07:54 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
Hi Sasha,
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Ming Lei tom.leim...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Sasha,
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com
wrote:
[ 232.822703] sysfs_dir_pos-973 sysfs_dirent use after free:
Hi Sasha,
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:28 AM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/19/2013 07:54 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
With v3 of the patch:
[ 1275.665758] sysfs_dir_pos-973 sysfs_dirent use after free:
tun(tun)-uevent, 2-1472641949
Thanks again for your test.
Looks it is caused
Hi Sasha,
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> [ 232.822703] sysfs_dir_pos-973 sysfs_dirent use after free:
> vx855(vx855)-bind, 0-25520352
Looks filp->f_pos is changed as zero by llseek(), so may leave
filp->private_data
point to one refcount-balanced sysfs_dirent object,
On 03/17/2013 12:23 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>
>> I still see it going on with the patch applied:
>
> Looks the previous patch still has the race problem, so could you just
> apply the attachment patch and cancel all previous patches for the
>
On 03/17/2013 12:23 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
I still see it going on with the patch applied:
Looks the previous patch still has the race problem, so could you just
apply the attachment patch and cancel all previous
Hi Sasha,
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
[ 232.822703] sysfs_dir_pos-973 sysfs_dirent use after free:
vx855(vx855)-bind, 0-25520352
Looks filp-f_pos is changed as zero by llseek(), so may leave
filp-private_data
point to one refcount-balanced
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>
> I still see it going on with the patch applied:
Looks the previous patch still has the race problem, so could you just
apply the attachment patch and cancel all previous patches for the
test? If there is still the problem, please post out
On 03/16/2013 09:02 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 2:33 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>
>> I don't think it shows what we want it to show thought:
>>
>> [ 327.416905] Pid: 10504, comm: trinity-child98 Tainted: GW
>> 3.9.0-rc2-next-20130315-sasha-00046-gecde602-dirty #301
>>
On 03/16/2013 09:02 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 2:33 AM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think it shows what we want it to show thought:
[ 327.416905] Pid: 10504, comm: trinity-child98 Tainted: GW
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
I still see it going on with the patch applied:
Looks the previous patch still has the race problem, so could you just
apply the attachment patch and cancel all previous patches for the
test? If there is still the
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 2:33 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>
> I don't think it shows what we want it to show thought:
>
> [ 327.416905] Pid: 10504, comm: trinity-child98 Tainted: GW
> 3.9.0-rc2-next-20130315-sasha-00046-gecde602-dirty #301
> [ 327.418815] Call Trace:
> [ 327.419255] []
On 03/16/2013 11:58 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:22 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Sasha Levin
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Ming,
>>>
>>> With your patch:
>>>
>>>
>>> [ 1525.874312] release_sysfs_dirent sysfs_dirent use after free:
>>> ptysb-uevent
>>
>>
On 03/16/2013 11:22 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ming,
>>
>> With your patch:
>>
>>
>> [ 1525.874312] release_sysfs_dirent sysfs_dirent use after free: ptysb-uevent
>
> Sasha, thanks for your test.
>
> So is the oops always triggered on
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:22 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ming,
>>
>> With your patch:
>>
>>
>> [ 1525.874312] release_sysfs_dirent sysfs_dirent use after free: ptysb-uevent
>
> Sasha, thanks for your test.
>
> So is the oops always
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>
> Hi Ming,
>
> With your patch:
>
>
> [ 1525.874312] release_sysfs_dirent sysfs_dirent use after free: ptysb-uevent
Sasha, thanks for your test.
So is the oops always triggered on this node of 'ptysb-uevent' or the node name
is changed
On 03/16/2013 09:30 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Hillf Danton wrote:
>> init rb node before use due to empty node checked by rb_next().
>>
>> --- a/fs/sysfs/dir.cSat Mar 16 20:12:16 2013
>> +++ b/fs/sysfs/dir.cSat Mar 16 20:37:10 2013
>> @@ -396,6 +396,7 @@
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Hillf Danton wrote:
> init rb node before use due to empty node checked by rb_next().
>
> --- a/fs/sysfs/dir.cSat Mar 16 20:12:16 2013
> +++ b/fs/sysfs/dir.cSat Mar 16 20:37:10 2013
> @@ -396,6 +396,7 @@ struct sysfs_dirent *sysfs_new_dirent(co
>
>
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 03/15/2013 12:03 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On 03/07/2013 01:26 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:02:30PM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 12:28:54AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
>>> > > general
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/15/2013 12:03 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
On 03/07/2013 01:26 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:02:30PM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 12:28:54AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Hillf Danton dhi...@gmail.com wrote:
init rb node before use due to empty node checked by rb_next().
--- a/fs/sysfs/dir.cSat Mar 16 20:12:16 2013
+++ b/fs/sysfs/dir.cSat Mar 16 20:37:10 2013
@@ -396,6 +396,7 @@ struct sysfs_dirent *sysfs_new_dirent(co
On 03/16/2013 09:30 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Hillf Danton dhi...@gmail.com wrote:
init rb node before use due to empty node checked by rb_next().
--- a/fs/sysfs/dir.cSat Mar 16 20:12:16 2013
+++ b/fs/sysfs/dir.cSat Mar 16 20:37:10 2013
@@ -396,6 +396,7 @@
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Ming,
With your patch:
[ 1525.874312] release_sysfs_dirent sysfs_dirent use after free: ptysb-uevent
Sasha, thanks for your test.
So is the oops always triggered on this node of 'ptysb-uevent' or the node name
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:22 PM, Ming Lei tom.leim...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Ming,
With your patch:
[ 1525.874312] release_sysfs_dirent sysfs_dirent use after free: ptysb-uevent
Sasha, thanks for your test.
So
On 03/16/2013 11:22 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Ming,
With your patch:
[ 1525.874312] release_sysfs_dirent sysfs_dirent use after free: ptysb-uevent
Sasha, thanks for your test.
So is the oops always triggered on
On 03/16/2013 11:58 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:22 PM, Ming Lei tom.leim...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Ming,
With your patch:
[ 1525.874312] release_sysfs_dirent sysfs_dirent use after free:
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 2:33 AM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think it shows what we want it to show thought:
[ 327.416905] Pid: 10504, comm: trinity-child98 Tainted: GW
3.9.0-rc2-next-20130315-sasha-00046-gecde602-dirty #301
[ 327.418815] Call Trace:
[
On 03/15/2013 03:38 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On 03/15/2013 12:03 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>>
>>> [ 350.140100] general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
>>> DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
>>> [ 350.141468] Dumping ftrace buffer:
>>> [
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 03/15/2013 12:03 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>
>> [ 350.140100] general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
>> DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
>> [ 350.141468] Dumping ftrace buffer:
>> [ 350.142048](ftrace buffer empty)
>> [ 350.142619]
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/15/2013 12:03 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
[ 350.140100] general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
[ 350.141468] Dumping ftrace buffer:
[ 350.142048](ftrace buffer empty)
[
On 03/15/2013 03:38 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Sasha Levin levinsasha...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/15/2013 12:03 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
[ 350.140100] general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
[ 350.141468] Dumping ftrace buffer:
[
On 03/15/2013 12:03 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 03/07/2013 01:26 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:02:30PM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 12:28:54AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
>> > > general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
>> > > Modules
On 03/07/2013 01:26 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:02:30PM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 12:28:54AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
> > > Modules linked in: vmw_vsock_vmci_transport vmw_vmci vsock
On 03/07/2013 01:26 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:02:30PM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 12:28:54AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
Modules linked in: vmw_vsock_vmci_transport vmw_vmci vsock bnep
On 03/15/2013 12:03 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
On 03/07/2013 01:26 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:02:30PM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 12:28:54AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
Modules linked in:
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> Could be some of those that caused these bugs.
>
> I just retried rerunning the test a few times. Every time I run for a while
> I end up with different crashes. It's raining bugs over here.
> (Here's another sysfs one below)
>
> Running
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
Could be some of those that caused these bugs.
I just retried rerunning the test a few times. Every time I run for a while
I end up with different crashes. It's raining bugs over here.
(Here's another sysfs one below)
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:02:30PM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 12:28:54AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
> > Modules linked in: vmw_vsock_vmci_transport vmw_vmci vsock bnep fuse
> > rfcomm hidp l2tp_ppp l2tp_core
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 12:28:54AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
> Modules linked in: vmw_vsock_vmci_transport vmw_vmci vsock bnep fuse rfcomm
> hidp l2tp_ppp l2tp_core 8021q garp mrp dlci pppoe pppox ppp_generic slhc
> scsi_transport_iscsi rose
general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
Modules linked in: vmw_vsock_vmci_transport vmw_vmci vsock bnep fuse rfcomm
hidp l2tp_ppp l2tp_core 8021q garp mrp dlci pppoe pppox ppp_generic slhc
scsi_transport_iscsi rose caif_socket caif can_raw bridge af_key can_bcm llc2
stp can netrom
general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
Modules linked in: vmw_vsock_vmci_transport vmw_vmci vsock bnep fuse rfcomm
hidp l2tp_ppp l2tp_core 8021q garp mrp dlci pppoe pppox ppp_generic slhc
scsi_transport_iscsi rose caif_socket caif can_raw bridge af_key can_bcm llc2
stp can netrom
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 12:28:54AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
Modules linked in: vmw_vsock_vmci_transport vmw_vmci vsock bnep fuse rfcomm
hidp l2tp_ppp l2tp_core 8021q garp mrp dlci pppoe pppox ppp_generic slhc
scsi_transport_iscsi rose
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 02:02:30PM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 12:28:54AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
Modules linked in: vmw_vsock_vmci_transport vmw_vmci vsock bnep fuse
rfcomm hidp l2tp_ppp l2tp_core 8021q
50 matches
Mail list logo
