lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [broken-out-2007-07-20-00-22] kernel bug at kernel/params:570
    Oh, which means ...


    On 7/21/07, Satyam Sharma <satyam.sharma@gmail.com> wrote:
    > On 7/21/07, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote:
    > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 03:59:12PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 15:50:47 -0700
    > > > Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 06:32:21PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
    > > > > > Hi Greg,
    > > > > >
    > > > > > This looks like a sysfs bug
    > > > > > http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/tbf/bitis-gabonica/
    > > > > > broken-out-2007-07-20-00-22/00003.jpg
    > > > > >
    > > > > > l *kernel_param_sysfs_setup+0x75
    > > > > > 0xc13c0894 is in kernel_param_sysfs_setup (kernel/params.c:570).
    > > > > > 565 mk->mod = THIS_MODULE;
    > > > > > 566 kobj_set_kset_s(mk, module_subsys);

    > > > > > 567 kobject_set_name(&mk->kobj, name);

    Shouldn't the return of kobject_set_name() be checked here?

    [ Looking at code, and realizing that kobject_set_name() manages to
    succeed even when given a null string! ]

    > > > > > 568 kobject_init(&mk->kobj);
    > > > > > 569 ret = kobject_add(&mk->kobj);
    > > > > > 570 BUG_ON(ret < 0);
    > > > > > 571 param_sysfs_setup(mk, kparam, num_params, name_skip);
    > > > > > 572 kobject_uevent(&mk->kobj, KOBJ_ADD);
    > > > > > 573 }
    > > > > > 574
    > > > > >
    > > > > > http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/tbf/bitis-gabonica/
    > > > > > broken-out-2007-07-20-00-22/mm-config
    > > > >
    > > > > What kernel version is this happening on? The -mm tree? Can you try
    > > > > Linus's tree instead?
    > > > >
    > > > > It looks like there was some needed information right before the first
    > > > > stack dump, showing exactly what kobject was trying to be added that was
    > > > > already present. Odds are this is a kernel parameter with the same name
    > > > > as a duplicate one within the same module,
    >
    > I don't think that's an -EEXIST.
    >
    > I think what we have here is kobject_add() exiting with -EINVAL.
    > (kobject attempted to be registered with no name!)
    >
    > [ The first trace on that screen shows: kobject_shadow_add+0x5b/0x189.
    > That's the WARN_ON(1) at lib/kobject.c:176. If it was a EEXIST case,
    > we would've seen an offset in kobject_shadow_add closer to 0x189,
    > because the dump_stack() for EEXIST is barely 4 instructions before
    > we return from that function. ]
    >
    > > > > but the trick is going to be
    > > > > trying to figure out what module is causing this.
    >
    > So I'd guess we want to search for a module that's passing a kobject *
    > to kobject_add() such that !kobj->k_name is true.

    Oh, that's kernel_param_sysfs_setup itself. So we actually need to
    search for a built-in module in Michal's config that ... has an ... empty
    "" modname !? Shouldn't that turn up pretty quickly in a grep?

    How do I do that, btw?
    -
    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: 2007-07-21 02:07    [W:0.025 / U:1.776 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site