On 03/07/2013 04:59 AM, ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Li Zefan <lizefan@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Cc: sasha.levin@xxxxxxxxxx >> Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: container >> >> This is a second report... and the same address: 0xfffffffffffffff0 > > Actually this is the third report I have seen with that address, and the > others were on x86_64. > > The obvious answer is that there is something subtlely wrong with: > > commit b67bfe0d42cac56c512dd5da4b1b347a23f4b70a > Author: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed Feb 27 17:06:00 2013 -0800 > > hlist: drop the node parameter from iterators > > > This is the only change the pid namespace that I am aware of in 3.9-rc1. > > If you can reproduce this somewhat readily can you please revert the > hlist change and see if this continues to happen. Right now there are > no other code changes that I can see. And the address > 0xfffffffffffffff0 is consistent with a bug in hlist_for_each_entry_rcu. Looks like the hlist change is probably the issue, though it specifically uses: #define hlist_entry_safe(ptr, type, member) \ (ptr) ? hlist_entry(ptr, type, member) : NULL I'm still looking at the code in question and it's assembly, but I can't figure out what's going wrong. I was also trying to see what's so special about this loop in find_pid_ns as opposed to the rest of the kernel code that uses hlist_for_each_entry_rcu() but couldn't find out why. Is it somehow possible that if we rcu_dereference_raw() the same thing twice inside the same rcu_read_lock() section we'll get different results? That's really the only reason for this crash that comes to mind at the moment, very unlikely - but that's all I have right now. Is this bug reproducible easily on your setup? I've managed to reproduce it exactly 3 times in the past month or so, twice when I reported it and only once since then - at some point I thought that it was a freak compiler issue that went away when the code changed but since you're reporting it again I guess that it isn't the case. Paul, any chance you can give hlist_for_each_entry_rcu() a second look please? I know you've already acked it before, but is it possible I missed a subtle detail with RCU that causes this? Thanks, Sasha _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers