Bug 918422

Summary:	Unlinking open files in efivarfs causes oops
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Lingzhu Xiang <lxiang>
Component:	kernel	Assignee:	Kernel Maintainer List <kernel-maint>
Status:	CLOSED INSUFFICIENT_DATA	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	18	CC:	gansalmon, itamar, jforbes, jonathan, kernel-maint, lxiang, madhu.chinakonda, qcai, the.ridikulus.rat
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	x86_64
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2013-11-27 16:08:30 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Lingzhu Xiang 2013-03-06 08:31:44 UTC

Description of problem:

Reported a while ago in upstream. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.efi/455

Patch was posted but has more bug. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.efi/597

There hasn't seemed to be activity on this recently. Track it here.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
kernel-3.8.2-201.fc18.x86_64

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Get tools/testing/selftests/efivarfs/ from mainline kernel
2. cd tools/testing/selftests/efivarfs/
3. make run_tests
  
Actual results:
Kernel oops in test_open_unlink.

Expected results:
No kernel oops.

Comment 1 Justin M. Forbes 2013-03-12 15:27:14 UTC

I am not sure where you got 3.8.2-201, but kernel-3.8.2-206.fc18 does have some  evivarfs fixes backported from upstream. Does this kernel work for you?

Comment 2 Lingzhu Xiang 2013-03-13 02:53:41 UTC

I got 3.8.2-201 from koji. Upstream hasn't resolved this bug. Only a patch was proposed but failed testing, so it isn't backported. I just reproduced oops with 3.8.2-206.fc18.

Comment 3 Josh Boyer 2013-04-11 19:54:28 UTC

Lingzhu, these should be fixed with the patches coming in 3.9 or 3.10, correct?

Comment 4 Lingzhu Xiang 2013-04-15 02:30:53 UTC

Probably no. Jeremy Kerr has been quiet since then. I'm not sure if he will update his patch any time soon.

Comment 6 Justin M. Forbes 2013-10-18 21:03:37 UTC

*********** MASS BUG UPDATE **************

We apologize for the inconvenience.  There is a large number of bugs to go through and several of them have gone stale.  Due to this, we are doing a mass bug update across all of the Fedora 18 kernel bugs.

Fedora 18 has now been rebased to 3.11.4-101.fc18.  Please test this kernel update (or newer) and let us know if you issue has been resolved or if it is still present with the newer kernel.

If you have moved on to Fedora 19, and are still experiencing this issue, please change the version to Fedora 19.

If you experience different issues, please open a new bug report for those.

Comment 7 Justin M. Forbes 2013-11-27 16:08:30 UTC

*********** MASS BUG UPDATE **************

We apologize for the inconvenience.  There is a large number of bugs to go through and several of them have gone stale.  

It has been over a month since we asked you to test the 3.11 kernel updates and let us know if your issue has been resolved or is still a problem. When this happened, the bug was set to needinfo.  Because the needinfo is still set, we assume either this is no longer a problem, or you cannot provide additional information to help us resolve the issue.  As a result we are closing with insufficient data. If this is still a problem, we apologize, feel free to reopen the bug and provide more information so that we can work towards a resolution

If you experience different issues, please open a new bug report for those.

Comment 8 Red Hat Bugzilla 2023-09-14 01:41:56 UTC

The needinfo request[s] on this closed bug have been removed as they have been unresolved for 1000 days