Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [LKP] [dmi] PANIC: early exception 0e rip 10:ffffffff81899e6b error 9 cr2 ffffffffff240000 | From | Matt Fleming <> | Date | Fri, 7 Nov 2014 09:16:02 +0000 |
| |
On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 08:17 +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On 7 November 2014 06:47, LKP <lkp@01.org> wrote: > > FYI, we noticed the below changes on > > > > https://git.linaro.org/people/ard.biesheuvel/linux-arm efi-for-3.19 > > commit aacdce6e880894acb57d71dcb2e3fc61b4ed4e96 ("dmi: add support for SMBIOS 3.0 64-bit entry point") > > > > > > +-----------------------+------------+------------+ > > | | 2fa165a26c | aacdce6e88 | > > +-----------------------+------------+------------+ > > | boot_successes | 20 | 10 | > > | early-boot-hang | 1 | | > > | boot_failures | 0 | 5 | > > | PANIC:early_exception | 0 | 5 | > > +-----------------------+------------+------------+ > > > > > > [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0000000100000000-0x000000036fffffff] usable > > [ 0.000000] bootconsole [earlyser0] enabled > > [ 0.000000] NX (Execute Disable) protection: active > > PANIC: early exception 0e rip 10:ffffffff81899e6b error 9 cr2 ffffffffff240000 > > [ 0.000000] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper Not tainted 3.18.0-rc2-gc5221e6 #1 > > [ 0.000000] 0000000000000000 ffffffff82203d30 ffffffff819f0a6e 00000000000003f8 > > [ 0.000000] ffffffffff240000 ffffffff82203e18 ffffffff823701b0 ffffffff82511401 > > [ 0.000000] 0000000000000000 0000000000000ba3 0000000000000000 ffffffffff240000 > > [ 0.000000] Call Trace: > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff819f0a6e>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x68 > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823701b0>] early_idt_handler+0x90/0xb7 > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823c80da>] ? dmi_save_one_device+0x81/0x81 > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff81899e6b>] ? dmi_table+0x3f/0x94 > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff81899e42>] ? dmi_table+0x16/0x94 > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823c80da>] ? dmi_save_one_device+0x81/0x81 > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823c80da>] ? dmi_save_one_device+0x81/0x81 > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823c7eff>] dmi_walk_early+0x44/0x69 > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823c88a2>] dmi_present+0x180/0x1ff > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823c8ab3>] dmi_scan_machine+0x144/0x191 > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff82370702>] ? loglevel+0x31/0x31 > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff82377f52>] setup_arch+0x490/0xc73 > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff819eef73>] ? printk+0x4d/0x4f > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff82370b90>] start_kernel+0x9c/0x43f > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff82370120>] ? early_idt_handlers+0x120/0x120 > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823704a2>] x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c > > [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff823705df>] x86_64_start_kernel+0x13b/0x14a > > [ 0.000000] RIP 0x4 > > > > This is most puzzling. Could anyone decode the exception? > This looks like the non-EFI path through dmi_scan_machine(), which > calls dmi_present() /after/ calling dmi_smbios3_present(), which > apparently has not found the _SM3_ header tag. Or could the call stack > be inaccurate?
The code triggered a page fault while trying to access 0xffffffffff240000, caused because the reserved bit was set in the page table and no page was found. Looks like it jumped through a bogus pointer.
And yes, the callstack may definitely be wrong - the stack dumper is just scraping addresses from the stack, as indicated by the '?' symbol.
Yuanhan, what symbol does 0xffffffff81899e6b (the faulting instruction) translate to?
| |