On Friday, 13 of June 2008, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > With kernel 2.6.26-rc5 and a git kernel just between rc4 and rc5, my > kernel panic on my Montvale machine when I did an initial specweb2005 > testing between 2 machines. I have created the Bugzilla entry at http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10908 for this bug. Can you add yourself to the CC list in there, please? > Below is the log. > > LOGIN: Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference (address 0000000000000000) > Thread-7266[13494]: Oops 8804682956800 [1] > Modules linked in: > > Pid: 13494, CPU 0, comm: Thread-7266 > psr : 0000101008026018 ifs : 800000000000050e ip : [<a00000010087a4b0>] Not tainted (2.6.26-rc4git) > ip is at tcp_rcv_established+0x1450/0x16e0 > unat: 0000000000000000 pfs : 000000000000050e rsc : 0000000000000003 > rnat: 0000000000000000 bsps: 0000000000000000 pr : 000000000059656b > ldrs: 0000000000000000 ccv : 0000000000000000 fpsr: 0009804c8a70033f > csd : 0000000000000000 ssd : 0000000000000000 > b0 : a00000010087a410 b6 : a0000001004c7ac0 b7 : a0000001004c64e0 > f6 : 000000000000000000000 f7 : 1003e0000000000000b80 > f8 : 10000821f080500000000 f9 : 1003efffffffffffffa58 > f10 : 1003edbb7db5f6be58df8 f11 : 1003e0000000000000015 > r1 : a0000001010cce90 r2 : e0000003d4530c40 r3 : 0000000000000105 > r8 : e000000402533d68 r9 : e000000402533a80 r10 : e000000402533bfc > r11 : 0000000000000004 r12 : e0000003d4537df0 r13 : e0000003d4530000 > r14 : 0000000000000000 r15 : e000000401fca180 r16 : e0000003d4530c68 > r17 : e000000402572238 r18 : 00000000000000ff r19 : a0000001012c6630 > r20 : e0000003d4530c68 r21 : e000000401fca480 r22 : e000000402572658 > r23 : e000000402572240 r24 : a0000001012c4e04 r25 : 0000000000000003 > r26 : e000000401fca4a8 r27 : e000000402572660 r28 : e00000040a2d2a00 > r29 : e00000040a6f83a8 r30 : e00000040a6f8300 r31 : 000000000000000a > > Call Trace: > [<a000000100014de0>] show_stack+0x40/0xa0 > sp=e0000003d45379c0 bsp=e0000003d4531440 > [<a0000001000156f0>] show_regs+0x850/0x8a0 > sp=e0000003d4537b90 bsp=e0000003d45313e0 > [<a000000100038d10>] die+0x230/0x360 > sp=e0000003d4537b90 bsp=e0000003d4531398 > [<a00000010005cec0>] ia64_do_page_fault+0x8e0/0xa40 > sp=e0000003d4537b90 bsp=e0000003d4531348 > [<a00000010000b120>] ia64_leave_kernel+0x0/0x280 > sp=e0000003d4537c20 bsp=e0000003d4531348 > [<a00000010087a4b0>] tcp_rcv_established+0x1450/0x16e0 > sp=e0000003d4537df0 bsp=e0000003d45312d8 > [<a000000100888370>] tcp_v4_do_rcv+0x70/0x500 > sp=e0000003d4537df0 bsp=e0000003d4531298 > [<a00000010088cd30>] tcp_v4_rcv+0xfb0/0x1060 > sp=e0000003d4537e00 bsp=e0000003d4531248 > > > > As a matter of fact, kernel paniced at statement > "queue->rskq_accept_tail->dl_next = req" in function reqsk_queue_add, because > queue->rskq_accept_tail is NULL. The call chain is: > tcp_rcv_established => inet_csk_reqsk_queue_add => reqsk_queue_add. > > As I was running an initial specweb2005(configured 3500 sessions) testing between > 2 machines, there were lots of failure and many network connections were > reestablished during the testing. > > In function tcp_v4_rcv, bh_lock_sock_nested(sk) (a kind of spinlock) is used to > avoid race. But inet_csk_accept uses lock_sock(sk) (a kind of sleeper). Although > lock_sock also accesses sk->sk_lock.slock, it looks like there is a race. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
![]() |