On Wed, 2009-07-29 at 13:36 -0700, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 04:41:51PM -0700, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-07-28 at 16:22 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:20:02 +0200 > > > "Lermytte Christophe" <Christophe.Lermytte@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Morton [mailto:akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > > > > Sent: Sat 7/25/2009 9:53 AM > > > > > > > > > > (cc cpufreq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 22:07:49 +0200 Christophe Lermytte <christophe.lermytte@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Today, I tried to change the governor to conservative using the GNOME > > > > > > cpufreqd applet. The applet subsequently hangs and the following appears > > > > > > in the kernel traces: > > > > > > > > > > > > [ 3067.249054] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at > > > > > > 00000020 > > > > > > [ 3067.249062] IP: [<c1302d23>] dbs_cpufreq_notifier+0x17/0x2b > > > > > > [ 3067.249074] *pde = 00000000 > > > > > > [ 3067.249078] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP > > > > > > [ 3067.249083] last sysfs > > > > > > file: /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_governor > > > > > > [ 3067.249087] Modules linked in: cdc_wdm cdc_acm > > > > > > [ 3067.249093] > > > > > > [ 3067.249098] Pid: 1346, comm: kondemand/1 Not tainted (2.6.31-rc3 #2) > > > > > > Latitude D630 > > > > > > [ 3067.249103] EIP: 0060:[<c1302d23>] EFLAGS: 00010286 CPU: 1 > > > > > > [ 3067.249108] EIP is at dbs_cpufreq_notifier+0x17/0x2b > > > > > > [ 3067.249112] EAX: 00000000 EBX: f6959f00 ECX: 00000000 EDX: c278c300 > > > > > > [ 3067.249116] ESI: fffffffe EDI: 00000000 EBP: 00000000 ESP: f6959e78 > > > > > > [ 3067.249120] DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0000 SS: 0068 > > > > > > [ 3067.249124] Process kondemand/1 (pid: 1346, ti=f6958000 task=f69020a0 > > > > > > task.ti=f6958000) > > > > > > [ 3067.249128] Stack: > > > > > > [ 3067.249130] c161ba54 c1427067 f6959f00 00000000 c176d000 f6959f00 > > > > > > c176cfe4 00000000 > > > > > > [ 3067.249139] <0> c103a57e ffffffff 00000000 00000000 00000001 f64de590 > > > > > > f8416980 f6959f00 > > > > > > [ 3067.249149] <0> c103a59c ffffffff 00000000 c100f8b0 f6bcf240 ffffffea > > > > > > 00000003 00000000 > > > > > > [ 3067.249160] Call Trace: > > > > > > [ 3067.249166] [<c1427067>] ? notifier_call_chain+0x2a/0x47 > > > > > > [ 3067.249175] [<c103a57e>] ? __srcu_notifier_call_chain+0x32/0x47 > > > > > > [ 3067.249181] [<c103a59c>] ? srcu_notifier_call_chain+0x9/0xc > > > > > > [ 3067.249193] [<c100f8b0>] ? acpi_cpufreq_target+0x1a7/0x2b1 > > > > > > [ 3067.249197] [<c100f5ba>] ? get_measured_perf+0x1f/0x140 > > > > > > [ 3067.249201] [<c103db6d>] ? getnstimeofday+0x4d/0xd0 > > > > > > [ 3067.249205] [<c1300802>] ? cpufreq_register_driver+0xb1/0x15b > > > > > > [ 3067.249209] [<c100f709>] ? acpi_cpufreq_target+0x0/0x2b1 > > > > > > [ 3067.249213] [<c13008f5>] ? __cpufreq_driver_target+0x49/0x55 > > > > > > [ 3067.249217] [<c13029a0>] ? do_dbs_timer+0x262/0x2b8 > > > > > > [ 3067.249222] [<c1033b50>] ? worker_thread+0x137/0x1b3 > > > > > > [ 3067.249226] [<c130273e>] ? do_dbs_timer+0x0/0x2b8 > > > > > > [ 3067.249229] [<c1037042>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2d > > > > > > [ 3067.249233] [<c1033a19>] ? worker_thread+0x0/0x1b3 > > > > > > [ 3067.249236] [<c1036da6>] ? kthread+0x69/0x6e > > > > > > [ 3067.249240] [<c1036d3d>] ? kthread+0x0/0x6e > > > > > > [ 3067.249244] [<c100334f>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10 > > > > > > [ 3067.249246] Code: c7 44 24 18 ea ff ff ff 8b 44 24 18 83 c4 20 5b 5e > > > > > > 5f 5d c3 53 8b 01 ba 00 83 6c c1 89 cb 03 14 85 6c b9 66 c1 8b 4a 18 8b > > > > > > 42 60 <3b> 41 20 77 05 3b 41 1c 73 06 8b 43 08 89 42 60 31 c0 5b c3 53 > > > > > > [ 3067.249282] EIP: [<c1302d23>] dbs_cpufreq_notifier+0x17/0x2b SS:ESP > > > > > > 0068:f6959e78 > > > > > > [ 3067.249287] CR2: 0000000000000020 > > > > > > [ 3067.249296] ---[ end trace 5cb870966b6883a7 ]--- > > > > > > > > > > > I assume that this is repeatable and that 2.6.30 was OK? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > Yes, I do not encounter it on 2.6.30.2 and I can reproduce it continuously on 2.6.31-rc3 and 2.6.31-rc4. > > > > > > > > Regards. > > > > > > Thanks. So we have a repeatable kernel-crashing post-2.6.30 regression. > > > > > > this_dbs_info->cur_policy is NULL in dbs_cpufreq_notifier(). > > > > > > Looks like a bug in cpufreq_conservative.c > > dbs_cpufreq_notifier() is a frequency change notifier function that > > operates on policy structure without holding any lock. So, if policy > > structure goes away for any reason, this is going to fail. Looking at > > the code, there is nothing preventing this code from crashing in .30 as > > well. > > > > I am sorry. I was totally off the mark in my assessment of this yesterday. > This is indeed a regression introduced with my changset here > ee88415caf736b89500f16e0a545614541a45005 > > Below patch should fix it. Can you please verify. > > Thanks, > Venki Patch applied on .31-rc4, I no longer see the kernel bug message. Thanks, Christophe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
