lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jul]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: OOPS (kswapd) in 2.4.5 and 2.4.6
Date
On Fri, 06 Jul 2001, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Henry wrote:
> >
> > ...
> > Dual-cpu pentium 233 (intel) with 128MB RAM and more than double that swap.
> >
> > ...
> > Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000008
> > c01b4227
> > *pde = 00000000
> > Oops: 0000
> > CPU: 0
> > EIP: 0010:[<c01b4227>]
> > Using defaults from ksymoops -t elf32-i386 -a i386
> > EFLAGS: 00010207
> > eax: 00000001 ebx: 00000000 ecx: 000000c0 edx: c12c49c0
> > esi: c12d3f4c edi: 00000001 ebp: c0d0f2a0 esp: c12d3ee0
> > ds: 0018 es: 0018 ss: 0018
> > Process kswapd (pid: 3, stackpage=c12d3000)
> > Stack: 00000000 c12d3f4c c12d3f4c c01330cb 00000001 00000000 001c4300 c1203048
> > 00000000 00000028 c0129752 00000001 c1203048 00000305 c12d3f48 00001000
> > 001c4300 c1203048 00000000 00000028 c12d3f48 00000000 00001000 00001c43
> > Call Trace: [<c01330cb>] [<c0129752>] [<c0106cec>] [<c012981f>] [<c012a4e8>] [<c
> > 0128b1d>] [<c01293f5>]
> > [<c0129486>] [<c01054cc>]
> > Code: 0f b7 43 08 66 c1 e8 09 0f b7 f0 8b 43 18 a8 04 75 19 68 a7
> >
> > >>EIP; c01b4227 <submit_bh+b/74> <=====
> > Trace; c01330cb <brw_page+8f/a0>
> > Trace; c0129752 <rw_swap_page_base+152/1b0>
> > Trace; c0106cec <ret_from_intr+0/7>
> > Trace; c012981f <rw_swap_page+6f/b8>
> > Trace; c012a4e8 <swap_writepage+78/80>
> > Trace; c0128b1d <page_launder+285/874>
> > Trace; c01293f5 <do_try_to_free_pages+1d/58>
> > Trace; c0129486 <kswapd+56/e8>
> > Trace; c01054cc <kernel_thread+28/38>
>
> There does appear to be an SMP race in brw_page() which can cause
> this - end_buffer_io_async() unlocks the page, try_to_free_buffers()
> zaps the buffer_head ring and brw_page() gets a null pointer. But
> gee, it's unlikely unless you have super-fast disks and/or something
> which has a super-slow interrupt routine.
>
> Could you please provide a description of your hardware lineup?
>
> And could you please test 2.4.6 with this patch?
>
> --- linux-2.4.6/fs/buffer.c Wed Jul 4 18:21:31 2001
> +++ lk-ext3/fs/buffer.c Fri Jul 6 18:25:00 2001
> @@ -2181,8 +2181,9 @@ int brw_page(int rw, struct page *page,
>
> /* Stage 2: start the IO */
> do {
> + struct buffer_head *next = bh->b_this_page;
> submit_bh(rw, bh);
> - bh = bh->b_this_page;
> + bh = next;
> } while (bh != head);
> return 0;
> }


Howzit Andrew

So far, so good. There has not been a single oops on the two principle
servers I patched.

uptime1: 8:04am up 18:22, 1 user, load average: 0.09, 0.15, 0.11
uptime2: 8:04am up 18:25, 1 user, load average: 0.15, 0.20, 0.15

Andrew my china, you are the _MAN_! We should know by monday afternoon
(the monday morning/midday crunch should provide some valuable
feedback).

Cheers
Henry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:56    [W:0.061 / U:0.520 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site