* [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review
@ 2010-08-13 21:47 Greg KH
2010-08-13 21:42 ` [1/3] mm: keep a guard page below a grow-down stack segment Greg KH
` (5 more replies)
0 siblings, 6 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-13 21:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, stable; +Cc: stable-review, torvalds, akpm, alan
NOTE!
If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? It contains
a few core changes that I couldn't validate myself as I don't seem to
have a machine that will even boot the .27 kernel anymore after my move.
I didn't want to include them in the last .27-stable release because of
this, so any testing is much appreciated. Especially if you happen to
run across any signal and/or stack issues that might be floating around
in the ether...
----
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 2.6.27.52 release.
There are 3 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to
this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let
us know. If anyone is a maintainer of the proper subsystem, and wants
to add a Signed-off-by: line to the patch, please respond with it.
Responses should be made by Monday, August 16, 2010, 20:00:00 UTC.
Anything received after that time might be too late.
The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/stable-review/patch-2.6.27.52-rc1.gz
and the diffstat can be found below.
thanks,
greg k-h
Makefile | 2 +-
arch/x86/mm/fault.c | 9 ++++++++-
mm/memory.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* [1/3] mm: keep a guard page below a grow-down stack segment 2010-08-13 21:47 [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review Greg KH @ 2010-08-13 21:42 ` Greg KH 2010-08-13 21:42 ` [2/3] mm: fix missing page table unmap for stack guard page failure case Greg KH ` (4 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-13 21:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel, stable; +Cc: stable-review, torvalds, akpm, alan 2.6.27-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know. ------------------ From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> commit 320b2b8de12698082609ebbc1a17165727f4c893 upstream. This is a rather minimally invasive patch to solve the problem of the user stack growing into a memory mapped area below it. Whenever we fill the first page of the stack segment, expand the segment down by one page. Now, admittedly some odd application might _want_ the stack to grow down into the preceding memory mapping, and so we may at some point need to make this a process tunable (some people might also want to have more than a single page of guarding), but let's try the minimal approach first. Tested with trivial application that maps a single page just below the stack, and then starts recursing. Without this, we will get a SIGSEGV _after_ the stack has smashed the mapping. With this patch, we'll get a nice SIGBUS just as the stack touches the page just above the mapping. Requested-by: Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de> --- mm/memory.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) --- a/mm/memory.c +++ b/mm/memory.c @@ -2396,6 +2396,26 @@ out_nomap: } /* + * This is like a special single-page "expand_downwards()", + * except we must first make sure that 'address-PAGE_SIZE' + * doesn't hit another vma. + * + * The "find_vma()" will do the right thing even if we wrap + */ +static inline int check_stack_guard_page(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address) +{ + address &= PAGE_MASK; + if ((vma->vm_flags & VM_GROWSDOWN) && address == vma->vm_start) { + address -= PAGE_SIZE; + if (find_vma(vma->vm_mm, address) != vma) + return -ENOMEM; + + expand_stack(vma, address); + } + return 0; +} + +/* * We enter with non-exclusive mmap_sem (to exclude vma changes, * but allow concurrent faults), and pte mapped but not yet locked. * We return with mmap_sem still held, but pte unmapped and unlocked. @@ -2408,6 +2428,9 @@ static int do_anonymous_page(struct mm_s spinlock_t *ptl; pte_t entry; + if (check_stack_guard_page(vma, address) < 0) + return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS; + /* Allocate our own private page. */ pte_unmap(page_table); ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* [2/3] mm: fix missing page table unmap for stack guard page failure case 2010-08-13 21:47 [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review Greg KH 2010-08-13 21:42 ` [1/3] mm: keep a guard page below a grow-down stack segment Greg KH @ 2010-08-13 21:42 ` Greg KH 2010-08-13 21:42 ` [3/3] x86: dont send SIGBUS for kernel page faults Greg KH ` (3 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-13 21:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel, stable; +Cc: stable-review, torvalds, akpm, alan 2.6.27-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know. ------------------ From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> commit 5528f9132cf65d4d892bcbc5684c61e7822b21e9 upstream. .. which didn't show up in my tests because it's a no-op on x86-64 and most other architectures. But we enter the function with the last-level page table mapped, and should unmap it at exit. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de> --- mm/memory.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) --- a/mm/memory.c +++ b/mm/memory.c @@ -2428,8 +2428,10 @@ static int do_anonymous_page(struct mm_s spinlock_t *ptl; pte_t entry; - if (check_stack_guard_page(vma, address) < 0) + if (check_stack_guard_page(vma, address) < 0) { + pte_unmap(page_table); return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS; + } /* Allocate our own private page. */ pte_unmap(page_table); ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* [3/3] x86: dont send SIGBUS for kernel page faults 2010-08-13 21:47 [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review Greg KH 2010-08-13 21:42 ` [1/3] mm: keep a guard page below a grow-down stack segment Greg KH 2010-08-13 21:42 ` [2/3] mm: fix missing page table unmap for stack guard page failure case Greg KH @ 2010-08-13 21:42 ` Greg KH 2010-08-13 22:36 ` [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review Grant Coady ` (2 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-13 21:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel, stable; +Cc: stable-review, torvalds, akpm, alan 2.6.27-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know. ------------------ Based on commit 96054569190bdec375fe824e48ca1f4e3b53dd36 upstream, authored by Linus Torvalds. This is my backport to the .27 kernel tree, hopefully preserving the same functionality. Original commit message: It's wrong for several reasons, but the most direct one is that the fault may be for the stack accesses to set up a previous SIGBUS. When we have a kernel exception, the kernel exception handler does all the fixups, not some user-level signal handler. Even apart from the nested SIGBUS issue, it's also wrong to give out kernel fault addresses in the signal handler info block, or to send a SIGBUS when a system call already returns EFAULT. Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de> --- arch/x86/mm/fault.c | 9 ++++++++- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c @@ -589,6 +589,7 @@ void __kprobes do_page_fault(struct pt_r unsigned long address; int write, si_code; int fault; + int should_exit_no_context = 0; #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 unsigned long flags; #endif @@ -876,6 +877,9 @@ no_context: oops_end(flags, regs, SIGKILL); #endif + if (should_exit_no_context) + return; + /* * We ran out of memory, or some other thing happened to us that made * us unable to handle the page fault gracefully. @@ -901,8 +905,11 @@ do_sigbus: up_read(&mm->mmap_sem); /* Kernel mode? Handle exceptions or die */ - if (!(error_code & PF_USER)) + if (!(error_code & PF_USER)) { + should_exit_no_context = 1; goto no_context; + } + #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32 /* User space => ok to do another page fault */ if (is_prefetch(regs, address, error_code)) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-13 21:47 [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review Greg KH ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2010-08-13 21:42 ` [3/3] x86: dont send SIGBUS for kernel page faults Greg KH @ 2010-08-13 22:36 ` Grant Coady 2010-08-13 23:07 ` Greg KH 2010-08-13 22:45 ` Willy Tarreau 2010-08-14 11:11 ` Gabor Z. Papp 5 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Grant Coady @ 2010-08-13 22:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: linux-kernel, stable, stable-review, torvalds, akpm, alan On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:47:04 -0700, you wrote: >NOTE! > >If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? It contains >a few core changes that I couldn't validate myself as I don't seem to >have a machine that will even boot the .27 kernel anymore after my move. I surely will, just as soon as the thing appears ;) Ftp and http return nothing just now. Grant. > >I didn't want to include them in the last .27-stable release because of >this, so any testing is much appreciated. Especially if you happen to >run across any signal and/or stack issues that might be floating around >in the ether... > >---- > >This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 2.6.27.52 release. >There are 3 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to >this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let >us know. If anyone is a maintainer of the proper subsystem, and wants >to add a Signed-off-by: line to the patch, please respond with it. > >Responses should be made by Monday, August 16, 2010, 20:00:00 UTC. >Anything received after that time might be too late. > >The whole patch series can be found in one patch at: > kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/stable-review/patch-2.6.27.52-rc1.gz >and the diffstat can be found below. > >thanks, > >greg k-h > > Makefile | 2 +- > arch/x86/mm/fault.c | 9 ++++++++- > mm/memory.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-13 22:36 ` [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review Grant Coady @ 2010-08-13 23:07 ` Greg KH 2010-08-13 23:47 ` Grant Coady 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-13 23:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Grant Coady; +Cc: linux-kernel, stable, stable-review, torvalds, akpm, alan [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 565 bytes --] On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 08:36:34AM +1000, Grant Coady wrote: > On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:47:04 -0700, you wrote: > > >NOTE! > > > >If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? It contains > >a few core changes that I couldn't validate myself as I don't seem to > >have a machine that will even boot the .27 kernel anymore after my move. > > I surely will, just as soon as the thing appears ;) Ftp and http > return nothing just now. Odd, it should be there. Here it is, attached below. It's small enough to send out this way. thanks, greg k-h [-- Attachment #2: patch-2.6.27.52-rc1 --] [-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2439 bytes --] diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 5382c55..c7fde5f 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ VERSION = 2 PATCHLEVEL = 6 SUBLEVEL = 27 -EXTRAVERSION = .51 +EXTRAVERSION = .52-rc1 NAME = Trembling Tortoise # *DOCUMENTATION* diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c index 3384255..9d3c576 100644 --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c @@ -589,6 +589,7 @@ void __kprobes do_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code) unsigned long address; int write, si_code; int fault; + int should_exit_no_context = 0; #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 unsigned long flags; #endif @@ -876,6 +877,9 @@ no_context: oops_end(flags, regs, SIGKILL); #endif + if (should_exit_no_context) + return; + /* * We ran out of memory, or some other thing happened to us that made * us unable to handle the page fault gracefully. @@ -901,8 +905,11 @@ do_sigbus: up_read(&mm->mmap_sem); /* Kernel mode? Handle exceptions or die */ - if (!(error_code & PF_USER)) + if (!(error_code & PF_USER)) { + should_exit_no_context = 1; goto no_context; + } + #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32 /* User space => ok to do another page fault */ if (is_prefetch(regs, address, error_code)) diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c index 1300b70..7e308fc 100644 --- a/mm/memory.c +++ b/mm/memory.c @@ -2396,6 +2396,26 @@ out_nomap: } /* + * This is like a special single-page "expand_downwards()", + * except we must first make sure that 'address-PAGE_SIZE' + * doesn't hit another vma. + * + * The "find_vma()" will do the right thing even if we wrap + */ +static inline int check_stack_guard_page(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address) +{ + address &= PAGE_MASK; + if ((vma->vm_flags & VM_GROWSDOWN) && address == vma->vm_start) { + address -= PAGE_SIZE; + if (find_vma(vma->vm_mm, address) != vma) + return -ENOMEM; + + expand_stack(vma, address); + } + return 0; +} + +/* * We enter with non-exclusive mmap_sem (to exclude vma changes, * but allow concurrent faults), and pte mapped but not yet locked. * We return with mmap_sem still held, but pte unmapped and unlocked. @@ -2408,6 +2428,11 @@ static int do_anonymous_page(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma, spinlock_t *ptl; pte_t entry; + if (check_stack_guard_page(vma, address) < 0) { + pte_unmap(page_table); + return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS; + } + /* Allocate our own private page. */ pte_unmap(page_table); ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-13 23:07 ` Greg KH @ 2010-08-13 23:47 ` Grant Coady 2010-08-14 0:11 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 0:12 ` Linus Torvalds 0 siblings, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Grant Coady @ 2010-08-13 23:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: linux-kernel, stable, stable-review, torvalds, akpm, alan Hi Greg, I scraped the patches out of the messages and edited Makefile :) On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:07:12 -0700, you wrote: >On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 08:36:34AM +1000, Grant Coady wrote: >> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:47:04 -0700, you wrote: >> >> >NOTE! >> > >> >If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? It contains >> >a few core changes that I couldn't validate myself as I don't seem to >> >have a machine that will even boot the .27 kernel anymore after my move. Machine is running, but there's a lot of these in the dmesg: WARNING: at include/linux/security.h:1826 acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0() Modules linked in: Pid: 320, comm: khelper Not tainted 2.6.27.52-rc1a #57 [<c011b54f>] warn_on_slowpath+0x5f/0x90 [<c0145a53>] __alloc_pages_internal+0x93/0x420 [<c01456bd>] buffered_rmqueue+0x11d/0x210 [<c015e09a>] allocate_slab+0x4a/0xd0 [<c015e149>] setup_object+0x29/0x30 [<c015e204>] new_slab+0xb4/0x130 [<c015e6ec>] __slab_alloc+0xac/0x120 [<c01529e7>] acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0 [<c0152afa>] expand_stack+0x7a/0x90 [<c014fc61>] do_anonymous_page+0x121/0x130 [<c0150268>] handle_mm_fault+0x1b8/0x1e0 [<c014e724>] get_user_pages+0xe4/0x270 [<c0166ac9>] get_arg_page+0x49/0xc0 [<c0166e5b>] copy_strings+0xdb/0x180 [<c0166f29>] copy_strings_kernel+0x29/0x40 [<c0167dae>] do_execve+0xde/0x1d0 [<c0101f1f>] sys_execve+0x2f/0x60 [<c0103036>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb [<c011007b>] ioapic_register_intr+0x10b/0x110 [<c0106bfc>] kernel_execve+0x1c/0x30 [<c0128efc>] ____call_usermodehelper+0x5c/0xc0 [<c0128ea0>] ____call_usermodehelper+0x0/0xc0 [<c0103b1b>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x1c ======================= ---[ end trace 62e879f3daf4be6a ]--- You can view the .config and dmesg at: http://bugsplatter.id.au/kernel/boxen/deltree/config-2.6.27.52-rc1a.gz http://bugsplatter.id.au/kernel/boxen/deltree/dmesg-2.6.27.52-rc1a.gz Top and machine info: http://bugsplatter.id.au/kernel/boxen/deltree/ Box is Internet facing firewall running Slackware-11.0 and I have my streaming audio ;) Can't be too bad. Cheers, Grant. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-13 23:47 ` Grant Coady @ 2010-08-14 0:11 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 0:51 ` Linus Torvalds 2010-08-14 7:24 ` Grant Coady 2010-08-14 0:12 ` Linus Torvalds 1 sibling, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-14 0:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Grant Coady; +Cc: linux-kernel, stable, stable-review, torvalds, akpm, alan On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 09:47:08AM +1000, Grant Coady wrote: > Hi Greg, > > I scraped the patches out of the messages and edited Makefile :) > > On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:07:12 -0700, you wrote: > > >On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 08:36:34AM +1000, Grant Coady wrote: > >> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:47:04 -0700, you wrote: > >> > >> >NOTE! > >> > > >> >If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? It contains > >> >a few core changes that I couldn't validate myself as I don't seem to > >> >have a machine that will even boot the .27 kernel anymore after my move. > > Machine is running, but there's a lot of these in the dmesg: > > WARNING: at include/linux/security.h:1826 acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0() > Modules linked in: > Pid: 320, comm: khelper Not tainted 2.6.27.52-rc1a #57 > [<c011b54f>] warn_on_slowpath+0x5f/0x90 > [<c0145a53>] __alloc_pages_internal+0x93/0x420 > [<c01456bd>] buffered_rmqueue+0x11d/0x210 > [<c015e09a>] allocate_slab+0x4a/0xd0 > [<c015e149>] setup_object+0x29/0x30 > [<c015e204>] new_slab+0xb4/0x130 > [<c015e6ec>] __slab_alloc+0xac/0x120 > [<c01529e7>] acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0 > [<c0152afa>] expand_stack+0x7a/0x90 > [<c014fc61>] do_anonymous_page+0x121/0x130 > [<c0150268>] handle_mm_fault+0x1b8/0x1e0 > [<c014e724>] get_user_pages+0xe4/0x270 > [<c0166ac9>] get_arg_page+0x49/0xc0 > [<c0166e5b>] copy_strings+0xdb/0x180 > [<c0166f29>] copy_strings_kernel+0x29/0x40 > [<c0167dae>] do_execve+0xde/0x1d0 > [<c0101f1f>] sys_execve+0x2f/0x60 > [<c0103036>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > [<c011007b>] ioapic_register_intr+0x10b/0x110 > [<c0106bfc>] kernel_execve+0x1c/0x30 > [<c0128efc>] ____call_usermodehelper+0x5c/0xc0 > [<c0128ea0>] ____call_usermodehelper+0x0/0xc0 > [<c0103b1b>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x1c > ======================= > ---[ end trace 62e879f3daf4be6a ]--- I'm guessing that 2.6.27.51 didn't cause those warnings as well? That's a warning that current->mm is null. I don't know enough about the mm subsystem to say if this is normal or not, and I don't at first glance, see how this patch could have caused this to happen. Anyone else have an idea? thanks, greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 0:11 ` Greg KH @ 2010-08-14 0:51 ` Linus Torvalds 2010-08-14 2:53 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 7:24 ` Grant Coady 1 sibling, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Linus Torvalds @ 2010-08-14 0:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: Grant Coady, linux-kernel, stable, stable-review, akpm, alan On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote: > > That's a warning that current->mm is null. I don't know enough about > the mm subsystem to say if this is normal or not, and I don't at first > glance, see how this patch could have caused this to happen. We call that whole "expand_stack()" through handle_mm_fault(), and that's _not_ called just for the process itself. So "current->mm" is sometimes simply the wrong thing to use - like when you access the VM of another process (during fork for the argument setup of the new VM, or during ptrace etc). Which is why I think commit 05fa199d45c should fix it. It makes the stack expansion thing use the right mm. Which it just _happened_ to do before, because it was always called just from the faulting code where current->mm happened to be the right mm. But I really don't know if there might be other issues lurking too. Linus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 0:51 ` Linus Torvalds @ 2010-08-14 2:53 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 5:43 ` [Stable-review] " Willy Tarreau 2010-08-14 21:46 ` Greg KH 0 siblings, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-14 2:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Grant Coady, linux-kernel, stable, stable-review, akpm, alan On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 05:51:56PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote: > > > > That's a warning that current->mm is null. I don't know enough about > > the mm subsystem to say if this is normal or not, and I don't at first > > glance, see how this patch could have caused this to happen. > > We call that whole "expand_stack()" through handle_mm_fault(), and > that's _not_ called just for the process itself. So "current->mm" is > sometimes simply the wrong thing to use - like when you access the VM > of another process (during fork for the argument setup of the new VM, > or during ptrace etc). > > Which is why I think commit 05fa199d45c should fix it. It makes the > stack expansion thing use the right mm. Which it just _happened_ to do > before, because it was always called just from the faulting code where > current->mm happened to be the right mm. > > But I really don't know if there might be other issues lurking too. Ok, I'll go add that commit, and I unpacked my older machine that runs the .27 kernel and will beat on it with that box tomorrow to see if anything else pops up. thanks, greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [Stable-review] [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 2:53 ` Greg KH @ 2010-08-14 5:43 ` Willy Tarreau 2010-08-14 18:47 ` [stable] " Greg KH 2010-08-14 21:46 ` Greg KH 1 sibling, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2010-08-14 5:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH Cc: Linus Torvalds, Grant Coady, linux-kernel, stable, akpm, stable-review, alan On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 07:53:23PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 05:51:56PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote: > > > > > > That's a warning that current->mm is null. I don't know enough about > > > the mm subsystem to say if this is normal or not, and I don't at first > > > glance, see how this patch could have caused this to happen. > > > > We call that whole "expand_stack()" through handle_mm_fault(), and > > that's _not_ called just for the process itself. So "current->mm" is > > sometimes simply the wrong thing to use - like when you access the VM > > of another process (during fork for the argument setup of the new VM, > > or during ptrace etc). > > > > Which is why I think commit 05fa199d45c should fix it. It makes the > > stack expansion thing use the right mm. Which it just _happened_ to do > > before, because it was always called just from the faulting code where > > current->mm happened to be the right mm. > > > > But I really don't know if there might be other issues lurking too. > > Ok, I'll go add that commit, and I unpacked my older machine that runs > the .27 kernel and will beat on it with that box tomorrow to see if > anything else pops up. Greg, I confirm that 05fa199d45c fixes the warnings. I did not have them in .51, got them with .52-rc1 and got rid of it with the patch above. Regards, Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [stable] [Stable-review] [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 5:43 ` [Stable-review] " Willy Tarreau @ 2010-08-14 18:47 ` Greg KH 0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-14 18:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Willy Tarreau Cc: Greg KH, Grant Coady, linux-kernel, stable, akpm, Linus Torvalds, stable-review, alan [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1869 bytes --] On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 07:43:35AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 07:53:23PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 05:51:56PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote: > > > > > > > > That's a warning that current->mm is null. I don't know enough about > > > > the mm subsystem to say if this is normal or not, and I don't at first > > > > glance, see how this patch could have caused this to happen. > > > > > > We call that whole "expand_stack()" through handle_mm_fault(), and > > > that's _not_ called just for the process itself. So "current->mm" is > > > sometimes simply the wrong thing to use - like when you access the VM > > > of another process (during fork for the argument setup of the new VM, > > > or during ptrace etc). > > > > > > Which is why I think commit 05fa199d45c should fix it. It makes the > > > stack expansion thing use the right mm. Which it just _happened_ to do > > > before, because it was always called just from the faulting code where > > > current->mm happened to be the right mm. > > > > > > But I really don't know if there might be other issues lurking too. > > > > Ok, I'll go add that commit, and I unpacked my older machine that runs > > the .27 kernel and will beat on it with that box tomorrow to see if > > anything else pops up. > > Greg, I confirm that 05fa199d45c fixes the warnings. I did not have them > in .51, got them with .52-rc1 and got rid of it with the patch above. Wonderful. I've released a 2.6.27.52-rc2 with this fix in it. I'm building it and will test it on my box now. The full patch is below if anyone wants to try it out. Odds are it will need whatever patch Linus is currently working on for mainline, so I'll hold off on releasing a real release until that is all worked out. thanks, greg k-h [-- Attachment #2: patch-2.6.27.52-rc2 --] [-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2890 bytes --] diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 5382c55..096cde6 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ VERSION = 2 PATCHLEVEL = 6 SUBLEVEL = 27 -EXTRAVERSION = .51 +EXTRAVERSION = .52-rc2 NAME = Trembling Tortoise # *DOCUMENTATION* diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c index 3384255..9d3c576 100644 --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c @@ -589,6 +589,7 @@ void __kprobes do_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code) unsigned long address; int write, si_code; int fault; + int should_exit_no_context = 0; #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 unsigned long flags; #endif @@ -876,6 +877,9 @@ no_context: oops_end(flags, regs, SIGKILL); #endif + if (should_exit_no_context) + return; + /* * We ran out of memory, or some other thing happened to us that made * us unable to handle the page fault gracefully. @@ -901,8 +905,11 @@ do_sigbus: up_read(&mm->mmap_sem); /* Kernel mode? Handle exceptions or die */ - if (!(error_code & PF_USER)) + if (!(error_code & PF_USER)) { + should_exit_no_context = 1; goto no_context; + } + #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32 /* User space => ok to do another page fault */ if (is_prefetch(regs, address, error_code)) diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c index 1300b70..7e308fc 100644 --- a/mm/memory.c +++ b/mm/memory.c @@ -2396,6 +2396,26 @@ out_nomap: } /* + * This is like a special single-page "expand_downwards()", + * except we must first make sure that 'address-PAGE_SIZE' + * doesn't hit another vma. + * + * The "find_vma()" will do the right thing even if we wrap + */ +static inline int check_stack_guard_page(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address) +{ + address &= PAGE_MASK; + if ((vma->vm_flags & VM_GROWSDOWN) && address == vma->vm_start) { + address -= PAGE_SIZE; + if (find_vma(vma->vm_mm, address) != vma) + return -ENOMEM; + + expand_stack(vma, address); + } + return 0; +} + +/* * We enter with non-exclusive mmap_sem (to exclude vma changes, * but allow concurrent faults), and pte mapped but not yet locked. * We return with mmap_sem still held, but pte unmapped and unlocked. @@ -2408,6 +2428,11 @@ static int do_anonymous_page(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma, spinlock_t *ptl; pte_t entry; + if (check_stack_guard_page(vma, address) < 0) { + pte_unmap(page_table); + return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS; + } + /* Allocate our own private page. */ pte_unmap(page_table); diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c index f3e5bfe..08a32cf 100644 --- a/mm/mmap.c +++ b/mm/mmap.c @@ -1573,7 +1573,7 @@ static int acct_stack_growth(struct vm_area_struct * vma, unsigned long size, un * Overcommit.. This must be the final test, as it will * update security statistics. */ - if (security_vm_enough_memory(grow)) + if (security_vm_enough_memory_mm(mm, grow)) return -ENOMEM; /* Ok, everything looks good - let it rip */ ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 2:53 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 5:43 ` [Stable-review] " Willy Tarreau @ 2010-08-14 21:46 ` Greg KH 1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-14 21:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Grant Coady, linux-kernel, stable, stable-review, akpm, alan On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 07:53:23PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 05:51:56PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote: > > > > > > That's a warning that current->mm is null. I don't know enough about > > > the mm subsystem to say if this is normal or not, and I don't at first > > > glance, see how this patch could have caused this to happen. > > > > We call that whole "expand_stack()" through handle_mm_fault(), and > > that's _not_ called just for the process itself. So "current->mm" is > > sometimes simply the wrong thing to use - like when you access the VM > > of another process (during fork for the argument setup of the new VM, > > or during ptrace etc). > > > > Which is why I think commit 05fa199d45c should fix it. It makes the > > stack expansion thing use the right mm. Which it just _happened_ to do > > before, because it was always called just from the faulting code where > > current->mm happened to be the right mm. > > > > But I really don't know if there might be other issues lurking too. > > Ok, I'll go add that commit, and I unpacked my older machine that runs > the .27 kernel and will beat on it with that box tomorrow to see if > anything else pops up. It's booting here, but I'm out of time and have to go on vacation until Monday night and I'll pick this up on Tuesday again when I get back. thanks, greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 0:11 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 0:51 ` Linus Torvalds @ 2010-08-14 7:24 ` Grant Coady 2010-08-14 19:12 ` [stable] " Greg KH 1 sibling, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Grant Coady @ 2010-08-14 7:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: linux-kernel, stable, stable-review, torvalds, akpm, alan On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:11:58 -0700, you wrote: >On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 09:47:08AM +1000, Grant Coady wrote: >> Hi Greg, >> >> I scraped the patches out of the messages and edited Makefile :) >> >> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:07:12 -0700, you wrote: >> >> >On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 08:36:34AM +1000, Grant Coady wrote: >> >> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:47:04 -0700, you wrote: >> >> >> >> >NOTE! >> >> > >> >> >If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? It contains >> >> >a few core changes that I couldn't validate myself as I don't seem to >> >> >have a machine that will even boot the .27 kernel anymore after my move. >> >> Machine is running, but there's a lot of these in the dmesg: >> >> WARNING: at include/linux/security.h:1826 acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0() >> Modules linked in: >> Pid: 320, comm: khelper Not tainted 2.6.27.52-rc1a #57 >> [<c011b54f>] warn_on_slowpath+0x5f/0x90 >> [<c0145a53>] __alloc_pages_internal+0x93/0x420 >> [<c01456bd>] buffered_rmqueue+0x11d/0x210 >> [<c015e09a>] allocate_slab+0x4a/0xd0 >> [<c015e149>] setup_object+0x29/0x30 >> [<c015e204>] new_slab+0xb4/0x130 >> [<c015e6ec>] __slab_alloc+0xac/0x120 >> [<c01529e7>] acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0 >> [<c0152afa>] expand_stack+0x7a/0x90 >> [<c014fc61>] do_anonymous_page+0x121/0x130 >> [<c0150268>] handle_mm_fault+0x1b8/0x1e0 >> [<c014e724>] get_user_pages+0xe4/0x270 >> [<c0166ac9>] get_arg_page+0x49/0xc0 >> [<c0166e5b>] copy_strings+0xdb/0x180 >> [<c0166f29>] copy_strings_kernel+0x29/0x40 >> [<c0167dae>] do_execve+0xde/0x1d0 >> [<c0101f1f>] sys_execve+0x2f/0x60 >> [<c0103036>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb >> [<c011007b>] ioapic_register_intr+0x10b/0x110 >> [<c0106bfc>] kernel_execve+0x1c/0x30 >> [<c0128efc>] ____call_usermodehelper+0x5c/0xc0 >> [<c0128ea0>] ____call_usermodehelper+0x0/0xc0 >> [<c0103b1b>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x1c >> ======================= >> ---[ end trace 62e879f3daf4be6a ]--- > >I'm guessing that 2.6.27.51 didn't cause those warnings as well? Not in .51, the .51 dmesg is up now too: http://bugsplatter.id.au/kernel/boxen/deltree/dmesg-2.6.27.51a.gz > >That's a warning that current->mm is null. I don't know enough about >the mm subsystem to say if this is normal or not, and I don't at first >glance, see how this patch could have caused this to happen. > >Anyone else have an idea? > >thanks, > >greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [stable] [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 7:24 ` Grant Coady @ 2010-08-14 19:12 ` Greg KH 2010-08-15 1:28 ` Grant Coady 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-14 19:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Grant Coady Cc: Greg KH, linux-kernel, stable, akpm, torvalds, stable-review, alan On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 05:24:36PM +1000, Grant Coady wrote: > On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:11:58 -0700, you wrote: > > >On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 09:47:08AM +1000, Grant Coady wrote: > >> Hi Greg, > >> > >> I scraped the patches out of the messages and edited Makefile :) > >> > >> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:07:12 -0700, you wrote: > >> > >> >On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 08:36:34AM +1000, Grant Coady wrote: > >> >> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:47:04 -0700, you wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >NOTE! > >> >> > > >> >> >If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? It contains > >> >> >a few core changes that I couldn't validate myself as I don't seem to > >> >> >have a machine that will even boot the .27 kernel anymore after my move. > >> > >> Machine is running, but there's a lot of these in the dmesg: > >> > >> WARNING: at include/linux/security.h:1826 acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0() > >> Modules linked in: > >> Pid: 320, comm: khelper Not tainted 2.6.27.52-rc1a #57 > >> [<c011b54f>] warn_on_slowpath+0x5f/0x90 > >> [<c0145a53>] __alloc_pages_internal+0x93/0x420 > >> [<c01456bd>] buffered_rmqueue+0x11d/0x210 > >> [<c015e09a>] allocate_slab+0x4a/0xd0 > >> [<c015e149>] setup_object+0x29/0x30 > >> [<c015e204>] new_slab+0xb4/0x130 > >> [<c015e6ec>] __slab_alloc+0xac/0x120 > >> [<c01529e7>] acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0 > >> [<c0152afa>] expand_stack+0x7a/0x90 > >> [<c014fc61>] do_anonymous_page+0x121/0x130 > >> [<c0150268>] handle_mm_fault+0x1b8/0x1e0 > >> [<c014e724>] get_user_pages+0xe4/0x270 > >> [<c0166ac9>] get_arg_page+0x49/0xc0 > >> [<c0166e5b>] copy_strings+0xdb/0x180 > >> [<c0166f29>] copy_strings_kernel+0x29/0x40 > >> [<c0167dae>] do_execve+0xde/0x1d0 > >> [<c0101f1f>] sys_execve+0x2f/0x60 > >> [<c0103036>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > >> [<c011007b>] ioapic_register_intr+0x10b/0x110 > >> [<c0106bfc>] kernel_execve+0x1c/0x30 > >> [<c0128efc>] ____call_usermodehelper+0x5c/0xc0 > >> [<c0128ea0>] ____call_usermodehelper+0x0/0xc0 > >> [<c0103b1b>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x1c > >> ======================= > >> ---[ end trace 62e879f3daf4be6a ]--- > > > >I'm guessing that 2.6.27.51 didn't cause those warnings as well? > > Not in .51, the .51 dmesg is up now too: > > http://bugsplatter.id.au/kernel/boxen/deltree/dmesg-2.6.27.51a.gz Thanks, can you try 2.6.52-rc2 now? It should have the fix for this in it. greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [stable] [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 19:12 ` [stable] " Greg KH @ 2010-08-15 1:28 ` Grant Coady 0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Grant Coady @ 2010-08-15 1:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH Cc: Greg KH, linux-kernel, stable, akpm, torvalds, stable-review, alan On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 12:12:24 -0700, you wrote: >Thanks, can you try 2.6.52-rc2 now? It should have the fix for this in >it. Yup, looks good here :) http://bugsplatter.id.au/kernel/boxen/deltree/dmesg-2.6.27.52-rc2a.gz Grant. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-13 23:47 ` Grant Coady 2010-08-14 0:11 ` Greg KH @ 2010-08-14 0:12 ` Linus Torvalds 2010-08-14 0:47 ` Greg KH 1 sibling, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Linus Torvalds @ 2010-08-14 0:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Grant Coady; +Cc: Greg KH, linux-kernel, stable, stable-review, akpm, alan On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Grant Coady <gcoady.lk@gmail.com> wrote: > > Machine is running, but there's a lot of these in the dmesg: > > WARNING: at include/linux/security.h:1826 acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0() That would seem to be because of the lack of commit 05fa199d45c in 2.6.27. It got marked for stable, but probably never went so far back as 2.6.27. That said, I do wonder if it is worth it maintaining a 2.6.27 that the maintainer can't even boot on his machines any more. Linus ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 0:12 ` Linus Torvalds @ 2010-08-14 0:47 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 7:34 ` Grant Coady 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-14 0:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Grant Coady, linux-kernel, stable, stable-review, akpm, alan On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 05:12:57PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Grant Coady <gcoady.lk@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Machine is running, but there's a lot of these in the dmesg: > > > > WARNING: at include/linux/security.h:1826 acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0() > > That would seem to be because of the lack of commit 05fa199d45c in > 2.6.27. It got marked for stable, but probably never went so far back > as 2.6.27. Yup, I didn't include it there. Grant, if you add that, does the warning go away? > That said, I do wonder if it is worth it maintaining a 2.6.27 that the > maintainer can't even boot on his machines any more. Yeah, I'm beginning to wonder about it as well. I think it's expected lifespan is very near to the end. thanks, greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 0:47 ` Greg KH @ 2010-08-14 7:34 ` Grant Coady 2010-08-14 7:43 ` [Stable-review] " Willy Tarreau 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Grant Coady @ 2010-08-14 7:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: Linus Torvalds, linux-kernel, stable, stable-review, akpm, alan On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:47:29 -0700, you wrote: >On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 05:12:57PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Grant Coady <gcoady.lk@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Machine is running, but there's a lot of these in the dmesg: >> > >> > WARNING: at include/linux/security.h:1826 acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0() >> >> That would seem to be because of the lack of commit 05fa199d45c in >> 2.6.27. It got marked for stable, but probably never went so far back >> as 2.6.27. > >Yup, I didn't include it there. Grant, if you add that, does the >warning go away? I'm sorry, no idea at all how to cherry pick that, I don't know git :( Google brings up this thread but not that commit, point me at it and I'll try it. Grant. > >> That said, I do wonder if it is worth it maintaining a 2.6.27 that the >> maintainer can't even boot on his machines any more. > >Yeah, I'm beginning to wonder about it as well. I think it's expected >lifespan is very near to the end. > >thanks, > >greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [Stable-review] [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 7:34 ` Grant Coady @ 2010-08-14 7:43 ` Willy Tarreau 2010-08-14 8:52 ` Grant Coady 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2010-08-14 7:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Grant Coady Cc: Greg KH, linux-kernel, stable, akpm, Linus Torvalds, stable-review, alan On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 05:34:55PM +1000, Grant Coady wrote: > On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:47:29 -0700, you wrote: > > >On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 05:12:57PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Grant Coady <gcoady.lk@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > Machine is running, but there's a lot of these in the dmesg: > >> > > >> > WARNING: at include/linux/security.h:1826 acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0() > >> > >> That would seem to be because of the lack of commit 05fa199d45c in > >> 2.6.27. It got marked for stable, but probably never went so far back > >> as 2.6.27. > > > >Yup, I didn't include it there. Grant, if you add that, does the > >warning go away? > > I'm sorry, no idea at all how to cherry pick that, I don't know git :( > > Google brings up this thread but not that commit, point me at it and > I'll try it. Simply apply this patch (even by hand) : http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=05fa199d45c It solved the warnings for me. Cheers, Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [Stable-review] [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 7:43 ` [Stable-review] " Willy Tarreau @ 2010-08-14 8:52 ` Grant Coady 0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Grant Coady @ 2010-08-14 8:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Willy Tarreau Cc: Greg KH, linux-kernel, stable, akpm, Linus Torvalds, stable-review, alan On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 09:43:33 +0200, you wrote: >On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 05:34:55PM +1000, Grant Coady wrote: >> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:47:29 -0700, you wrote: >> >> >On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 05:12:57PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Grant Coady <gcoady.lk@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Machine is running, but there's a lot of these in the dmesg: >> >> > >> >> > WARNING: at include/linux/security.h:1826 acct_stack_growth+0xe7/0xf0() >> >> >> >> That would seem to be because of the lack of commit 05fa199d45c in >> >> 2.6.27. It got marked for stable, but probably never went so far back >> >> as 2.6.27. >> > >> >Yup, I didn't include it there. Grant, if you add that, does the >> >warning go away? >> >> I'm sorry, no idea at all how to cherry pick that, I don't know git :( >> >> Google brings up this thread but not that commit, point me at it and >> I'll try it. > >Simply apply this patch (even by hand) : > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=05fa199d45c > >It solved the warnings for me. Thanks Willy, got: grant@deltree:~/linux/linux-2.6.27.52-rc1b$ patch -p1 < ../patch-05fa199d45c patching file mm/mmap.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 1573 (offset -2 lines). Compiling. . . Yup, works for me :) http://bugsplatter.id.au/kernel/boxen/deltree/dmesg-2.6.27.52-rc1b.gz Cheers, Grant. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: [Stable-review] [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-13 21:47 [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review Greg KH ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2010-08-13 22:36 ` [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review Grant Coady @ 2010-08-13 22:45 ` Willy Tarreau 2010-08-14 11:11 ` Gabor Z. Papp 5 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Willy Tarreau @ 2010-08-13 22:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: linux-kernel, stable, akpm, torvalds, stable-review, alan On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 02:47:04PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > NOTE! > > If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? It contains > a few core changes that I couldn't validate myself as I don't seem to > have a machine that will even boot the .27 kernel anymore after my move. > > I didn't want to include them in the last .27-stable release because of > this, so any testing is much appreciated. Especially if you happen to > run across any signal and/or stack issues that might be floating around > in the ether... I will try it, Greg. If you want specific tests, do not hesitate to tell me which ones. Willy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re:2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-13 21:47 [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review Greg KH ` (4 preceding siblings ...) 2010-08-13 22:45 ` Willy Tarreau @ 2010-08-14 11:11 ` Gabor Z. Papp 2010-08-14 15:00 ` 2.6.27.52 " Grant Coady 2010-08-14 21:01 ` Greg KH 5 siblings, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Gabor Z. Papp @ 2010-08-14 11:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: linux-kernel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 252 bytes --] * Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>: | If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? BTW seems like 2.6.27 no more combatible with GNU Make 3.82: $ make oldconfig Makefile:443: *** mixed implicit and normal rules. Stop. Same with line 1609. [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #2: Makefile.diff --] [-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 897 bytes --] --- Makefile.orig 2010-08-13 23:02:40.000000000 +0200 +++ Makefile 2010-08-14 13:10:00.650815242 +0200 @@ -440,7 +440,11 @@ include $(srctree)/arch/$(SRCARCH)/Makefile export KBUILD_DEFCONFIG -config %config: scripts_basic outputmakefile FORCE +config: scripts_basic outputmakefile FORCE + $(Q)mkdir -p include/linux include/config + $(Q)$(MAKE) $(build)=scripts/kconfig $@ + +%config: scripts_basic outputmakefile FORCE $(Q)mkdir -p include/linux include/config $(Q)$(MAKE) $(build)=scripts/kconfig $@ @@ -1602,7 +1606,11 @@ $(Q)$(MAKE) $(build)=$(build-dir) $(target-dir)$(notdir $@) # Modules -/ %/: prepare scripts FORCE +/: prepare scripts FORCE + $(cmd_crmodverdir) + $(Q)$(MAKE) KBUILD_MODULES=$(if $(CONFIG_MODULES),1) \ + $(build)=$(build-dir) +%/: prepare scripts FORCE $(cmd_crmodverdir) $(Q)$(MAKE) KBUILD_MODULES=$(if $(CONFIG_MODULES),1) \ $(build)=$(build-dir) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 11:11 ` Gabor Z. Papp @ 2010-08-14 15:00 ` Grant Coady 2010-08-14 21:01 ` Greg KH 1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Grant Coady @ 2010-08-14 15:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gabor Z. Papp; +Cc: Greg KH, linux-kernel On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:11:43 +0200, you wrote: >* Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>: > >| If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? > >BTW seems like 2.6.27 no more combatible with GNU Make 3.82: > >$ make oldconfig >Makefile:443: *** mixed implicit and normal rules. Stop. > >Same with line 1609. I have: grant@deltree:~$ make --version GNU Make 3.81 Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. This program built for i486-slackware-linux-gnu and 2.6.27 builds here just fine. Grant. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 11:11 ` Gabor Z. Papp 2010-08-14 15:00 ` 2.6.27.52 " Grant Coady @ 2010-08-14 21:01 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 22:11 ` Thomas Backlund 1 sibling, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-14 21:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gabor Z. Papp; +Cc: linux-kernel On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 01:11:43PM +0200, Gabor Z. Papp wrote: > * Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>: > > | If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? > > BTW seems like 2.6.27 no more combatible with GNU Make 3.82: > > $ make oldconfig > Makefile:443: *** mixed implicit and normal rules. Stop. > > Same with line 1609. Nothing has changed with the main Makefile with the exception of changing the version number for a very long time. Did something else change on your system? odd, greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 21:01 ` Greg KH @ 2010-08-14 22:11 ` Thomas Backlund 2010-08-23 22:27 ` Greg KH 0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread From: Thomas Backlund @ 2010-08-14 22:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: Gabor Z. Papp, linux-kernel Greg KH skrev 15.8.2010 00:01: > On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 01:11:43PM +0200, Gabor Z. Papp wrote: >> * Greg KH<gregkh@suse.de>: >> >> | If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? >> >> BTW seems like 2.6.27 no more combatible with GNU Make 3.82: >> >> $ make oldconfig >> Makefile:443: *** mixed implicit and normal rules. Stop. >> >> Same with line 1609. > > Nothing has changed with the main Makefile with the exception of > changing the version number for a very long time. > > Did something else change on your system? > > odd, > 2.6.27 needs this wich went in after 2.6.28-rc8: kbuild: fix make incompatibility author Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:00:45 +0000 (23:00 +0100) committer Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:00:45 +0000 (23:00 +0100) commit 31110ebbec8688c6e9597b641101afc94e1c762a tree 208aaad7e40cbb86bc125760664911da8cd4eebb tree | snapshot parent abf681ce5b6f83f0b8883e0f2c12d197a38543dd commit | diff kbuild: fix make incompatibility "Paul Smith" <psmith@gnu.org> reported that we would fail to build with a new check that may be enabled in an upcoming version of make. The error was: Makefile:442: *** mixed implicit and normal rules. Stop. And I assume the powerpc make-3.82 fix (e32e78c5ee8aadef020fbaecbe6fb741ed9029fd) needs to be added to 2.6.27 too... -- Thomas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.6.27.52 stable review 2010-08-14 22:11 ` Thomas Backlund @ 2010-08-23 22:27 ` Greg KH 0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2010-08-23 22:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Backlund; +Cc: Greg KH, Gabor Z. Papp, linux-kernel On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 01:11:35AM +0300, Thomas Backlund wrote: > Greg KH skrev 15.8.2010 00:01: > >On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 01:11:43PM +0200, Gabor Z. Papp wrote: > >>* Greg KH<gregkh@suse.de>: > >> > >>| If I could get some people to please test this -rc release? > >> > >>BTW seems like 2.6.27 no more combatible with GNU Make 3.82: > >> > >>$ make oldconfig > >>Makefile:443: *** mixed implicit and normal rules. Stop. > >> > >>Same with line 1609. > > > >Nothing has changed with the main Makefile with the exception of > >changing the version number for a very long time. > > > >Did something else change on your system? > > > >odd, > > > > 2.6.27 needs this wich went in after 2.6.28-rc8: > > kbuild: fix make incompatibility > author Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> > Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:00:45 +0000 (23:00 +0100) > committer Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> > Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:00:45 +0000 (23:00 +0100) > commit 31110ebbec8688c6e9597b641101afc94e1c762a Now applied. thanks, greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-08-23 22:47 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 27+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2010-08-13 21:47 [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review Greg KH 2010-08-13 21:42 ` [1/3] mm: keep a guard page below a grow-down stack segment Greg KH 2010-08-13 21:42 ` [2/3] mm: fix missing page table unmap for stack guard page failure case Greg KH 2010-08-13 21:42 ` [3/3] x86: dont send SIGBUS for kernel page faults Greg KH 2010-08-13 22:36 ` [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review Grant Coady 2010-08-13 23:07 ` Greg KH 2010-08-13 23:47 ` Grant Coady 2010-08-14 0:11 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 0:51 ` Linus Torvalds 2010-08-14 2:53 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 5:43 ` [Stable-review] " Willy Tarreau 2010-08-14 18:47 ` [stable] " Greg KH 2010-08-14 21:46 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 7:24 ` Grant Coady 2010-08-14 19:12 ` [stable] " Greg KH 2010-08-15 1:28 ` Grant Coady 2010-08-14 0:12 ` Linus Torvalds 2010-08-14 0:47 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 7:34 ` Grant Coady 2010-08-14 7:43 ` [Stable-review] " Willy Tarreau 2010-08-14 8:52 ` Grant Coady 2010-08-13 22:45 ` Willy Tarreau 2010-08-14 11:11 ` Gabor Z. Papp 2010-08-14 15:00 ` 2.6.27.52 " Grant Coady 2010-08-14 21:01 ` Greg KH 2010-08-14 22:11 ` Thomas Backlund 2010-08-23 22:27 ` Greg KH
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.