From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF829C433F5 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 16:55:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1645462550; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post; bh=Uf2XPA+p6aeof0HGpJ2dGZ2iuJ9zOLf8PU2jlSbiItw=; b=iRGarnLSJBhfKIemNbbSBehzsH2wW21Bv1SAnLTc5au/j4EsczzWkNJNoMewSU2KDPnFRK j/pq1e9MUB8CDvNWKiZfcvbOzKtTlHfxB++tCnWYwTEubImmbh/FNYx0mP7tzT28nN6brz W0bCXq/qMde0VSov9KtRU9Nq84YJzRQ= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-177-TGK5PPlCMkeXaXCeRAEXQQ-1; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 11:55:47 -0500 X-MC-Unique: TGK5PPlCMkeXaXCeRAEXQQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC27218460E5; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 16:55:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (colo-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.21]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 852D4753E7; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 16:55:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.19.33]) by colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D3A54BB7C; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 16:55:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) by lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 21LGnroM001942 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 11:49:53 -0500 Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id 4AB90838D4; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 16:49:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.15.80.136]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 022FC82764; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 16:49:49 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 10:49:47 -0600 From: David Teigland To: Konstantin Kharlamov Message-ID: <20220221164947.GA18428@redhat.com> References: <3e96860d112e86ee55fba0e5fffbf1ee433905e6.camel@yandex.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3e96860d112e86ee55fba0e5fffbf1ee433905e6.camel@yandex.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-loop: linux-lvm@redhat.com Cc: linux-lvm@redhat.com Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Frequent crashes when accessing dev_name(dev) on an empty list X-BeenThere: linux-lvm@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: junk Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-lvm-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-lvm-bounces@redhat.com X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=linux-lvm-bounces@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 04:45:51PM +0300, Konstantin Kharlamov wrote: > So, what happened was that dev_name(dev) was extracting a `dev->aliases` element > , however `dev->aliases` was empty, thus the extracted element was a junk. > > Although we encountered these crashes on an older 2.03.07 version, however the > patch applies to latest master as well, thus the bugs are still relevant, which > is odd. This makes me wondering, is this a known problem, could I possibly > overlooked something, for example that dev->aliases should never be empty, and > thus the fix just works around another problem? Any thoughts? It's familiar, but I thought it was fixed. I don't remember the details, so we'll have to look at it again. It's related to a device being removed from the system while the command is running, which we need to add tests for. Dave _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list linux-lvm@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/