Subject : On 2.6.24-rc1-gc9927c2b BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 3d15b925 Submitter : Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@cateee.net> References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/10/24/487
hm, FUSE seems loaded (and is active?) and the backtrace suggests a truncate related race: [<c017c362>] inode_setattr+0x53/0x152 [<c017c53a>] notify_change+0xd9/0x2a3 [<c0169b51>] do_truncate+0x5e/0x75 [<c0169130>] get_unused_fd_flags+0x52/0xc1 could this be related to FUSE? There were a couple of FUSE fixes merged recently - could you check whether upstream kernel version e1cca7e8d484390169777 or later fixes this problem?
It's unlikely to be fuse related, because fuse doesn't call inode_setattr().
hi, * Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@cateee.net> wrote: > On 2.6.24-rc1-gc9927c2b BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at > virtual address 3d15b925 > > In last git, I see the following BUGs in various programs. It seems > reproducible, but sometime I've hard lookup on poweroff. do you still get this with more recent kernels? We had a number of fixes for memory corruptors since -rc1 - perhaps one of them took care of your problem as well. Ingo
Reply-To: cate@cateee.net Ingo Molnar wrote: > hi, > > * Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@cateee.net> wrote: > >> On 2.6.24-rc1-gc9927c2b BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at >> virtual address 3d15b925 >> >> In last git, I see the following BUGs in various programs. It seems >> reproducible, but sometime I've hard lookup on poweroff. > > do you still get this with more recent kernels? We had a number of fixes > for memory corruptors since -rc1 - perhaps one of them took care of your > problem as well. No, the problem was solved few days after the report. Thanks, cate
On Tuesday, 4 of December 2007, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: > Ingo Molnar wrote: > > hi, > > > > * Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@cateee.net> wrote: > > > >> On 2.6.24-rc1-gc9927c2b BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at > >> virtual address 3d15b925 > >> > >> In last git, I see the following BUGs in various programs. It seems > >> reproducible, but sometime I've hard lookup on poweroff. > > > > do you still get this with more recent kernels? We had a number of fixes > > for memory corruptors since -rc1 - perhaps one of them took care of your > > problem as well. > > No, the problem was solved few days after the report. Can you point me to the fix, please? Rafael
Perhaps you followed -git and the problem went away after a few days? Or is there a specific fix that you know solved this particular issue?
Reply-To: cate@cateee.net Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, 4 of December 2007, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: >> Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> hi, >>> >>> * Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@cateee.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2.6.24-rc1-gc9927c2b BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at >>>> virtual address 3d15b925 >>>> >>>> In last git, I see the following BUGs in various programs. It seems >>>> reproducible, but sometime I've hard lookup on poweroff. >>> do you still get this with more recent kernels? We had a number of fixes >>> for memory corruptors since -rc1 - perhaps one of them took care of your >>> problem as well. >> No, the problem was solved few days after the report. > > Can you point me to the fix, please? Unfortunately no. To much chaos in that period: I think I incurred into two or three different kernel bugs (and a Debian keyboard bug) in one or two days. Usually I find such important bugs only few times per year, and never together). I tried also git-bisect, but too much runs, to many non-compiling commits, bad environment (the Debian bug) and the quick fix of the kernel bug ;-) stopped me in further searching. ciao cate
On Wednesday, 5 of December 2007, bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote: > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9246 > > ------- Comment #7 from anonymous@kernel-bugs.osdl.org 2007-12-05 01:27 > ------- > Reply-To: cate@cateee.net > > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Tuesday, 4 of December 2007, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: > >> Ingo Molnar wrote: > >>> * Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@cateee.net> wrote: [--snip--]. > >> No, the problem was solved few days after the report. > > > > Can you point me to the fix, please? > > Unfortunately no. To much chaos in that period: > I think I incurred into two or three different kernel bugs > (and a Debian keyboard bug) in one or two days. Usually > I find such important bugs only few times per year, > and never together). > > I tried also git-bisect, but too much runs, to many non-compiling > commits, bad environment (the Debian bug) and the quick fix of the > kernel bug ;-) stopped me in further searching. I see. Then, please tell me what the first fixed kernel (ie. the first post 2.6.24-rc1-gc9927c2b kernel in which you didn't see the bug) was. :-)