Skip to contentSkip to conversation

List corruption and crash with kernel 3.1

DISCUSSION Anton Vorontsov 2 participants 2 messages Oct 13, 2011 – Oct 15, 2011 2 messages not in the archive

lore
Share & tools
lore
#2 lore raw
In reply to a message not in the archive

Resend, add proper Cc's.

Quoted 28 lines · Richard Purdie
Quoted 1 line · Andrew Morton

erk, help, who do I blame for this?

[...]

Quoted 3 lines
WARNING: at lib/list_debug.c:47 __list_del_entry+0x8d/0x98()
Hardware name: Latitude E4200

list_del corruption, ffff880075e147b0->next is LIST_POISON1 (dead000000100100)

[...]

Quoted 8 lines
 [<ffffffff81243861>] __list_del_entry+0x8d/0x98
 [<ffffffff8124387a>] list_del+0xe/0x2d
 [<ffffffff813a7e55>] led_trigger_unregister+0x29/0x9c
 [<ffffffff813a7ee1>] led_trigger_unregister_simple+0x19/0x26
 [<ffffffff813828e2>] power_supply_remove_triggers+0x21/0x8f
 [<ffffffff81381d42>] power_supply_unregister+0x1f/0x2c
 [<ffffffff812a7d1f>] sysfs_remove_battery+0x3c/0x54
 [<ffffffff812a8c4d>] acpi_battery_notify+0x46/0xaa

As far as I know (and can see from the changelogs), the LED trigger registration code hasn't changed in a long time. led_trigger_unregister_simple() and led_trigger_unregister() are relatively simple functions and looking at the latter, the list_del causing this is fairly clear.

What puzzles me is that led_trigger_unregister_simple() wouldn't call led_trigger_unregister() twice for the same trigger as it frees the memory.

Quoted 5 lines

However, if that function were called multiple times in parallel with the same trigger, I can imagine it racing.

My thought is therefore is something in the power_supply* code calling this function multiple times and a race?

I wonder if that patch helps:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/7/12/242

The traces are pretty similar.

Thanks,

Signature · 2 lines
Anton Vorontsov
Email: [email protected]
#3 lore raw
Quoted 8 lines · Anton Vorontsov

Resend, add proper Cc's.

Quoted 5 lines · Richard Purdie
Quoted 1 line · Andrew Morton

erk, help, who do I blame for this?

[...]

Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
WARNING: at lib/list_debug.c:47 __list_del_entry+0x8d/0x98()

I wonder if that patch helps:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/7/12/242

The traces are pretty similar.

Hi,

Sorry it took some time. I tried the patch with 2.6.39, it does not seem to help as I still observe the crash. I was not gifted with a warning in the logs, though.

(I used 2.6.39 because it's a kernel with a quite high rate of bugging on suspend/resume. I had to apply manually one of the chunks of the patch.)

Is there a debugging option which would help having more info on the log ?

Thanks,

Éric Brunet