Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933108AbcLIFmD (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Dec 2016 00:42:03 -0500 Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:46321 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752627AbcLIFmB (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Dec 2016 00:42:01 -0500 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Nikolay Borisov Cc: containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, serge@hallyn.com References: <20161010164046.GG24081@quack2.suse.cz> <1476171382-11911-1-git-send-email-kernel@kyup.com> <674564a4-ff05-b4d6-4a98-8cfc2e609325@kyup.com> <87twafci52.fsf@xmission.com> <100ecab5-6656-9ed6-c0f4-b9c97eae506a@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2016 18:38:57 +1300 In-Reply-To: <100ecab5-6656-9ed6-c0f4-b9c97eae506a@gmail.com> (Nikolay Borisov's message of "Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:14:50 +0200") Message-ID: <87zik5lkzy.fsf@xmission.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=1cFDwQ-0001He-I6;;;mid=<87zik5lkzy.fsf@xmission.com>;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=101.100.131.98;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX18fjTH1JfgWkNX4CTukLwP7GMqexTswQ38= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 101.100.131.98 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.7 XMSubLong Long Subject * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: No description available. * 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% * [score: 0.5000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Nikolay Borisov X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Timing: total 5305 ms - load_scoreonly_sql: 0.03 (0.0%), signal_user_changed: 3.9 (0.1%), b_tie_ro: 2.8 (0.1%), parse: 0.92 (0.0%), extract_message_metadata: 12 (0.2%), get_uri_detail_list: 1.81 (0.0%), tests_pri_-1000: 7 (0.1%), tests_pri_-950: 1.27 (0.0%), tests_pri_-900: 1.04 (0.0%), tests_pri_-400: 23 (0.4%), check_bayes: 22 (0.4%), b_tokenize: 7 (0.1%), b_tok_get_all: 7 (0.1%), b_comp_prob: 2.3 (0.0%), b_tok_touch_all: 3.0 (0.1%), b_finish: 0.68 (0.0%), tests_pri_0: 1336 (25.2%), check_dkim_signature: 0.52 (0.0%), check_dkim_adsp: 3.1 (0.1%), tests_pri_500: 3917 (73.8%), poll_dns_idle: 3909 (73.7%), rewrite_mail: 0.00 (0.0%) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] inotify: Convert to using per-namespace limits X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2013 Lines: 50 Nikolay Borisov writes: > On 8.12.2016 08:58, Nikolay Borisov wrote: >> >> >> On 8.12.2016 03:40, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >>> Nikolay Borisov writes: >>> >>>> Gentle ping, now that rc1 has shipped and Jan's sysctl concern hopefully >>>> resolved. >>> >>> After getting slowed down by some fixes I am now taking a hard look at >>> your patch in the hopes of merging it. >>> >>> Did you happen to see the kbuild test roboot boot failures and did you >>> happen to look into what caused them? I have just skimmed them and it >>> appears to be related to your patch. >> >> I saw them in the beginning but they did look like a generic memory >> corruption and I believe at the time those patches were submitted there >> was a lingering memory corruption hitting various patches. Thus I didn't >> think it was related to my patches. I've since left my work so been >> taking a bit of time off and haven't looked really hard, so those >> patches have been kind of lingering. >> >> >> But now that you mention it I will try and take a second look to see >> what might cause the memory corruption? Is there a way to force 0day to >> re-run them to see whether the failure was indeed caused by my patches >> or were intermittent? > > Ok, I took another look into the report but bear in mind that the > corruption indeed happened in retire_userns_sysctls. But also this row > in the report leads me to believe it's not my patch that's the culprit: > > [ 65.527277] INFO: Allocated in setup_userns_sysctls+0x3f/0xa6 age=5 > cpu=1 pid=418 > [ 65.558397] INFO: Freed in free_ctx+0x1d/0x20 age=6 cpu=0 pid=19 > > > So a free_ctx function did free it originally, likely causing the > corruption. And there is no such function involved in the code I'm touching. Yes. I read through your patch carefully and it doesn't look like it could possibly cause that kind of corruption, the code is just too simple. So I have (belatedly) placed this change in linux-next. Eric