Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||F-9 xen pv_ops : unimplemented failsafe_callback() called while running prelink|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Stephen Tweedie <sct>|
|Component:||kernel-xen||Assignee:||Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost>|
|Status:||CLOSED RAWHIDE||QA Contact:||Virtualization Bugs <virt-bugs>|
|Fixed In Version:||kernel-xen-184.108.40.206-2.fc10||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2008-05-11 18:04:56 EDT||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:|
Description Stephen Tweedie 2008-04-17 16:03:16 EDT
Description of problem: Oops observed on rawhide running 2.6.25-1.fc9.x86_64.xen: Kernel BUG at ffffffff80465fc0 [verbose debug info unavailable] invalid opcode: 0000  Pid: 3699, comm: prelink Not tainted 2.6.25-1.fc9.x86_64.xen #1 RIP: e030:[<ffffffff80465fc0>] [<ffffffff80465fc0>] xen_failsafe_callback+0x0/0x10 RSP: e02b:ffff88001459be00 EFLAGS: 00010002 and no backtrace was observed. (Backtrace was obtained for a second oops shortly afterwards.) Full dmesg to be attached. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): kernel-xen-2.6.25-1.fc9.x86_64 prelink-0.4.0-3.x86_64 How reproducible: Unknown: only observed once so far. Steps to Reproduce: Unknown: was observed during automatic daily background prelink.
Comment 1 Stephen Tweedie 2008-04-17 16:05:06 EDT
Created attachment 302798 [details] dmesg log of oopses
Comment 2 Mark McLoughlin 2008-04-18 03:11:43 EDT
So, here's our invalid opcode: ENTRY(xen_failsafe_callback) /*FIXME: implement me! */ ud2a ENDPROC(xen_failsafe_callback) Next thing, of course, is to find out what's going wrong that the failsafe callback is invoked. (Note: "invalid opcode" is generally just a BUG(), which is implemented using ud2 ... that caught me out before. Interesting that report_bug() continues to claim that it's a BUG() even if it can't find IP in the bug table, like in this case)
Comment 3 Stephen Tweedie 2008-04-18 09:26:30 EDT
Seems to be reproducible: running /etc/cron.daily/prelink manually just resulted in the same error within under a minute for me.
Comment 4 Mark McLoughlin 2008-04-18 10:54:56 EDT
(Removing from F9Blocker again - this isn't reproducible for me on a fresh install and it doesn't cause problems during installation. At this point it doesn't look like it would warrant holding up the release)
Comment 5 Stephen Tweedie 2008-04-18 12:44:39 EDT
It seems to happen every time for me, at least if I force the prelink with touch /var/lib/misc/prelink.force I also noticed that the prelink job itself errors out with: >>>>> /etc/cron.daily/prelink: line 47: 2738 Segmentation fault /usr/sbin/prelink -av $PRELINK_OPTS >> /var/log/prelink/prelink.log 2>&1 /usr/bin/ldd: line 161: /lib/ld-linux.so.2: cannot execute binary file >>>>> where /lib/ld-linux.so.2 is the old 32-bit glibc. Did you have this installed on your test-case install that completed prelink without error?
Comment 6 Mark McLoughlin 2008-04-21 12:10:40 EDT
(In reply to comment #5) > It seems to happen every time for me, at least if I force the prelink with > > touch /var/lib/misc/prelink.force Yeah, had tried that and variations of e.g. "prelink -au" followed by "prelink -avf" > I also noticed that the prelink job itself errors out with: > >>>>> > /etc/cron.daily/prelink: line 47: 2738 Segmentation fault > /usr/sbin/prelink -av $PRELINK_OPTS >> /var/log/prelink/prelink.log 2>&1 > /usr/bin/ldd: line 161: /lib/ld-linux.so.2: cannot execute binary file > >>>>> > where /lib/ld-linux.so.2 is the old 32-bit glibc. Did you have this installed > on your test-case install that completed prelink without error? Yep, have that.
Comment 7 Eduardo Habkost 2008-04-22 17:59:14 EDT
I couldn't reproduce it here, either. Maybe running it with 'kstack=64' on the kernel command-line could reveal other useful kernel addresses on the stack.
Comment 8 Stephen Tweedie 2008-04-23 12:39:01 EDT
'kstack=64' makes no difference.
Comment 9 Eduardo Habkost 2008-04-23 12:57:14 EDT
(In reply to comment #8) > 'kstack=64' makes no difference. Hasn't it shown more data after the "Stack:" line on the oops?
Comment 10 Eduardo Habkost 2008-04-23 14:30:39 EDT
'rpm -qa' output may help me to reproduce the bug. I bet there is an specific file that triggers the bug when loaded by the prelink script, so maybe having the exact set of packages installed will make the bug reproducible.
Comment 11 Eduardo Habkost 2008-04-24 12:09:39 EDT
Created attachment 303656 [details] clear %fs when loading new TLS descriptors (1/2) __switch_to() is on the backtrace before failsafe_callback(). Probably it is being triggered when returing from a hypercall at paravirt_leave_lazy_cpu_mode(). The two attached patches were an attempt to fix this, but I haven't tested them enough to make sure they are correct.
Comment 12 Eduardo Habkost 2008-04-24 12:10:37 EDT
Created attachment 303657 [details] clear %fs when loading new TLS descriptors (2/2)
Comment 13 Mark McLoughlin 2008-05-09 11:56:05 EDT
Here's where this shows up on kerneloops.org: http://www.kerneloops.org/oops.php?number=9341
Comment 14 Mark McLoughlin 2008-05-11 18:04:56 EDT
Should be fixed with kernel-xen-2.6.25-4.fc9 and kernel-xen-220.127.116.11-2.fc10 * Sun May 11 2008 Mark McLoughlin <email@example.com> - Fix oops during prelink (ehabkost, #442949)
Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2008-05-12 08:41:24 EDT
kernel-xen-2.6-2.6.25-4.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9