lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [regression] fib6_del() bug from 2.6.34-rc1 still present in 2.6.34
Julien BLACHE wrote, at 05/22/2010 11:55 PM:
> Hi,
>
> [subscribed to lkml but not netdev, Cc me on replies]
>
> I'm seeing a warning in fib6_del() that is very close to what was
> reported by Emil S Tantilov back in march/april for 2.6.34-rc1:
>
> <http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-netdev/2010/4/9/6274401/thread>
>
> It looks like there hasn't been a fix, other than what was mentioned in
> this thread for net-next and Emil reported that it did not fix it for
> him. So it looks like it's still there, alive and kicking.
>
> This is the warning I'm getting:

I saw the warning on 2.6.34-rc3. But on net-next tree the warning disappeared.
So I think the bug is fixed in net-next tree. My NIC driver is r8169.

The net-next tree is newer than 2.6.34, maybe the fix is not queued to 2.6.34.
So the warning also be present in 2.6.34.
Can you try net-next tree firstly?

--
Best Regards
-----
Shan Wei


>
> ------------[ cut here ]------------
> WARNING: at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1160 fib6_del+0x506/0x5b0()
> Hardware name: MacBookPro2,2
> Modules linked in: sco bnep rfcomm l2cap crc16 cpufreq_userspace cpufreq_powersave cpufreq_conservative nfsd nfs lockd auth_rpcgss sunrpc uinput btusb ath9k ath9k_common mac80211 ath9k_hw ath isight_firmware joydev cfg80211 i2c_i801 ohci1394 ieee1394 [last unloaded: scsi_wait_scan]
> Pid: 4020, comm: ifconfig Not tainted 2.6.34 #1
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff810389d3>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x73/0xb0
> [<ffffffff8142f956>] ? fib6_del+0x506/0x5b0
> [<ffffffff8102ceb3>] ? __wake_up+0x43/0x70
> [<ffffffff813c68ef>] ? netlink_broadcast+0x21f/0x410
> [<ffffffff8142c2ab>] ? __ip6_del_rt+0x4b/0x80
> [<ffffffff8142c436>] ? ip6_del_rt+0x26/0x30
> [<ffffffff81426dff>] ? __ipv6_ifa_notify+0x15f/0x200
> [<ffffffff81428d99>] ? addrconf_ifdown+0x159/0x350
> [<ffffffff8142915d>] ? addrconf_notify+0xed/0x920
> [<ffffffff81043d33>] ? lock_timer_base+0x33/0x70
> [<ffffffff810445ab>] ? mod_timer+0x11b/0x1a0
> [<ffffffff81054826>] ? notifier_call_chain+0x46/0x70
> [<ffffffff813b1ae5>] ? __dev_notify_flags+0x65/0x90
> [<ffffffff813b1b4b>] ? dev_change_flags+0x3b/0x70
> [<ffffffff813fd2a2>] ? devinet_ioctl+0x602/0x750
> [<ffffffff813a12ea>] ? T.945+0x1a/0x50
> [<ffffffff813a1589>] ? sock_ioctl+0x59/0x2a0
> [<ffffffff810bee55>] ? vfs_ioctl+0x35/0xd0
> [<ffffffff810bf018>] ? do_vfs_ioctl+0x88/0x570
> [<ffffffff810bf549>] ? sys_ioctl+0x49/0x80
> [<ffffffff810023eb>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> ---[ end trace b5a833c8e5539431 ]---
>
> I can reliably reproduce it on both ath9k and sky2 with the
> following sequence:
>
> # ifconfig eth0 up
> # ifconfig eth0 add 2001:7a8:5dd7:123::12/64
> # ifconfig eth0 down
> # ifconfig eth0 up
> # ifconfig eth0 add 2001:7a8:5dd7:123::12/64 <=== fails
> # ifconfig eth0 down <=== triggers the warning
>
> Note that this sequence is equivalent to:
> # ifup eth0
> # ifdown eth0
> # ifup eth0 (will fail because it cannot add the v6 address)
> # ifconfig eth0 down
>
> This regression breaks ifupdown as it always tries to add the v6 address
> when configuring the interface. It's a behaviour change compared to
> previous kernel versions.
>
> It looks like triggering this warning a couple times (3-4) in a row ends
> up locking up the machine, too.
>
> I can test patches etc.
>
> JB.
>




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-05-24 03:59    [W:0.085 / U:6.708 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site