Mel Gorman wrote:
On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 09:38:16PM +0530, Sachin Sant wrote:
While executing libhugetlbfs tests against 2.6.35-rc2 on
a x86_64 box came across the following GPF
eneral protection fault: 0000 [#1] SMP
last sysfs file: /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cache/index2/shared_cpu_map
CPU 3
Modules linked in: ipv6 mperf fuse loop dm_mod sr_mod cdrom usb_storage sg i2c_piix4 rtc_cmos bnx2 k8temp pcspkr serio_raw mptctl i2c_core rtc_core rtc_lib shpchp button pci_hotplug usbhid hid ohci_hcd ehci_hcd sd_mod crc_t10dif usbcore edd ext3 jbd fan thermal processor thermal_sys hwmon mptsas mptscsih mptbase scsi_transport_sas scsi_mod
Pid: 20232, comm: autotest Not tainted 2.6.35-rc2-autotest #1 Server Blade/BladeCenter LS21 -[79716AA]-
RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff813968ca>] [<ffffffff813968ca>] _raw_spin_lock+0x9/0x20
RSP: 0018:ffff880126e43d88 EFLAGS: 00010202
RAX: 0000000000010000 RBX: 0720072007200720 RCX: 0000000000000000
RDX: 0000000000000011 RSI: ffff8801293a7470 RDI: 0720072007200720
RBP: ffff880126e43d88 R08: ffff8801279df270 R09: 09f911029d74e35b
R10: 09f911029d74e35b R11: dead000000100100 R12: ffff8801278cae00
R13: 0720072007200710 R14: ffff8801297e71f8 R15: 0000000000000000
FS: 00007f461d6866f0(0000) GS:ffff880006180000(0000) knlGS:0000000055731b00
CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 00007f461d45a7b8 CR3: 0000000001713000 CR4: 00000000000006e0
DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
Process autotest (pid: 20232, threadinfo ffff880126e42000, task ffff8801297e4190)
Stack:
ffff880126e43db8 ffffffff810f6b80 ffff8801297ae858 ffff8801297e7190
<0> ffff8801297e7190 00007f461940e000 ffff880126e43e08 ffffffff810f025e
<0> 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000000 ffff88000618d690 ffff88000618d690
Call Trace:
[<ffffffff810f6b80>] unlink_anon_vmas+0x37/0xf2
[<ffffffff810f025e>] free_pgtables+0x5f/0xc9
[<ffffffff810f1ac1>] exit_mmap+0xe6/0x141
While at first glance this looks like a general bug, it might still be
some oddity in hugetlbfs. Sachin, how reproducible is this? I just ran the
libhugetlbfs tests just fine on x86-64. Can you post your .config please?
I think the root cause for this problem was same as the one
mentioned in this thread (Bug kmalloc-4096 : Poison overwritten)
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127586004308747&w=2 <http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127586004308747&w=2>
Some of the registers from the trace does seem to contain the
peculiar pattern : 0720072007200720
I was not able to recreate this problem again with latest snapshot.
Thanks
-Sachin
[<ffffffff81064a6d>] mmput+0x39/0xdb
[<ffffffff81068b4b>] exit_mm+0x119/0x126
[<ffffffff8106a3bb>] do_exit+0x225/0x721
[<ffffffff8106a928>] do_group_exit+0x71/0x9a
[<ffffffff8106a963>] sys_exit_group+0x12/0x16
[<ffffffff8102896b>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
Code: c2 c1 c0 10 39 c2 8d 90 00 00 01 00 75 04 f0 0f b1 17 0f 94 c2 0f b6 c2 85 c0 c9 0f 95 c0 0f b6 c0 c3 55 b8 00 00 01 00 48 89 e5 <f0> 0f c1 07 0f b7 d0 c1 e8 10 39 c2 74 07 f3 90 0f b7 17 eb f5
RIP [<ffffffff813968ca>] _raw_spin_lock+0x9/0x20
RSP <ffff880126e43d88>
---[ end trace 844bcf9372ef8fa1 ]---
Clocksource tsc unstable (delta = 4398037966381 ns)
Fixing recursive fault but reboot is needed!
Previous snapshot release (2.6.35-rc1-git5 6c5de280b6..) was good.
I am using version 2.8 of libhugetlbfs tests from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libhugetlbfs/files/
This implies it might not be easily reproducible because no commits
happened between that window that affected anon_vma locking. I have the
test running in a loop to see can I reproduce it.
Thanks
--
---------------------------------
Sachin Sant
IBM Linux Technology Center
India Systems and Technology Labs
Bangalore, India
---------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>