Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1577828
| From | Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: net: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected in skb_array_produce |
| Date | 2017-02-09 19:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t91kl-11Q-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <t8SAp-3UH-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <t8TPQ-4PF-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <t8UCd-56L-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <t91aG-J1-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 11:49:30AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> Hello, >> >> >> >> I've got the following report while running syzkaller fuzzer on mmotm >> >> (git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mhocko/mm.git) >> >> remotes/mmotm/auto-latest ee4ba7533626ba7bf2f8b992266467ac9fdc045e: >> >> >> > >> > [...] >> > >> >> >> >> other info that might help us debug this: >> >> >> >> Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario: >> >> >> >> CPU0 CPU1 >> >> ---- ---- >> >> lock(&(&r->consumer_lock)->rlock); >> >> local_irq_disable(); >> >> lock(&(&r->producer_lock)->rlock); >> >> lock(&(&r->consumer_lock)->rlock); >> >> <Interrupt> >> >> lock(&(&r->producer_lock)->rlock); >> >> >> > >> > Thanks a lot for the testing. >> > >> > Looks like we could address this by using skb_array_consume_bh() instead. >> > >> > Could you pls verify if the following patch works? >> >> No, I can't test it, sorry. This happened once on bots. And bots >> currently test only upstream versions. > > Which trees are tested? Will linux-next help? Linus tree, linux-next and mmotm at the moment.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
net: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected in skb_array_produce Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> - 2017-02-09 09:50 +0100
Re: net: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected in skb_array_produce Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> - 2017-02-09 11:10 +0100
Re: net: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected in skb_array_produce Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> - 2017-02-09 12:00 +0100
Re: net: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected in skb_array_produce "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> - 2017-02-09 19:00 +0100
Re: net: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected in skb_array_produce Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> - 2017-02-09 19:10 +0100
Re: net: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected in skb_array_produce "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> - 2017-02-09 19:20 +0100
Re: net: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected in skb_array_produce Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> - 2017-02-10 06:20 +0100
Re: net: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected in skb_array_produce "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> - 2017-02-09 19:20 +0100
Re: net: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected in skb_array_produce Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> - 2017-02-10 06:20 +0100
csiph-web