From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750823AbWFEVDt (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2006 17:03:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750826AbWFEVDs (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2006 17:03:48 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:11930 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750823AbWFEVDr (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2006 17:03:47 -0400 Subject: Re: 2.6.17-rc5-mm3 From: Arjan van de Ven To: Dave Jones Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20060605204456.GF6143@redhat.com> References: <20060603232004.68c4e1e3.akpm@osdl.org> <20060605194844.GA6143@redhat.com> <20060605130626.3f2917a2.akpm@osdl.org> <20060605200947.GC6143@redhat.com> <20060605204456.GF6143@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 23:03:43 +0200 Message-Id: <1149541423.3111.130.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 16:44 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 04:09:47PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > > > Try reverting debug-shared-irqs.patch, or disable the sound driver? > > Will turn off the sound driver, and see what happens. > > Win! It now boots. I blew it up really easy with a socket-fuzzer though. > (http://people.redhat.com/davej/sfuzz.c) > > [ 874.865028] ====================================== > [ 874.943738] [ BUG: bad unlock ordering detected! ] > [ 875.002919] -------------------------------------- > [ 875.062134] sfuzz/23915 is trying to release lock (&sctp_port_alloc_lock) at: > [ 875.149619] [] sctp_get_port_local+0xd0/0x285 [sctp] > [ 875.222636] but the next lock to release is: > [ 875.276019] (&sctp_port_hashtable[i].lock){-...}, at: [] sctp_get_port_local+0x90/0x285 [sctp] > [ 875.393031] this is "interesting" code to follow but it looks like a honest case of deliberate out of order unlock Signed-off-by: Arjan van de Ven --- net/sctp/socket.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Index: linux-2.6.17-rc5-mm3/net/sctp/socket.c =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.17-rc5-mm3.orig/net/sctp/socket.c +++ linux-2.6.17-rc5-mm3/net/sctp/socket.c @@ -4597,7 +4597,7 @@ static long sctp_get_port_local(struct s sctp_spin_unlock(&head->lock); } while (--remaining > 0); sctp_port_rover = rover; - sctp_spin_unlock(&sctp_port_alloc_lock); + spin_unlock_non_nested(&sctp_port_alloc_lock); /* Exhausted local port range during search? */ ret = 1;