From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754350AbYE1T6X (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 May 2008 15:58:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752683AbYE1T6P (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 May 2008 15:58:15 -0400 Received: from 1wt.eu ([62.212.114.60]:1308 "EHLO 1wt.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752669AbYE1T6O (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 May 2008 15:58:14 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 21:56:37 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Fede , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , OGAWA Hirofumi , Jan Engelhardt , Arjan van de Ven , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: bad pmd ffff810000207238(9090909090909090). Message-ID: <20080528195637.GA11662@1wt.eu> References: <483CBCDD.10401@lugmen.org.ar> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 07:36:07PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Tue, 27 May 2008, Fede wrote: > > > > Today I tried to start a firewalling script and failed due to an unrelated > > issue, but when I checked the log I saw this: > > > > May 27 20:38:15 kaoz ip_tables: (C) 2000-2006 Netfilter Core Team > > May 27 20:38:28 kaoz Netfilter messages via NETLINK v0.30. > > May 27 20:38:28 kaoz nf_conntrack version 0.5.0 (16384 buckets, 65536 max) > > May 27 20:38:28 kaoz ctnetlink v0.93: registering with nfnetlink. > > May 27 20:38:28 kaoz ClusterIP Version 0.8 loaded successfully > > May 27 20:38:28 kaoz mm/memory.c:127: bad pmd > > ffff810000207238(9090909090909090). > > > > I also found another post with a very similar issue. The other post had almost > > the same message (*mm*/*memory*.*c*:*127*: *bad* *pmd* > > ffff810000207808(9090909090909090).) > > > > Does anyone know what is it? > > Thanks a lot for re-reporting this: it was fun to work it out. > It's not a rootkit, it's harmless, but we ought to fix the noise. > Simple patch below, but let me explain more verbosely first. > > What was really interesting in your report was that the address > is so close to that in OGAWA-San's report. I had a look at that > page on my x86_64 boxes, and they have lots of 0x90s there too. > It's just some page alignment filler that x86_64 kernel startup > has missed cleaning up - patch below fixes that. There's no > security aspect to it: the entries were already not-present, > they just generate this noise by triggering the pmd_bad test. Is there a particular reason we use 0x90 as an alignment filler ? If we can put anything else, at least next time it will not get confused with NOPs. We could use 0xAF (Alignment Filler) for instance. Well done BTW ;-) Reagrds, Willy