Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+G9fYv7fESqpGoeKmHoJsst6wfRNMi2wQLGm+PsjbLDuDjdMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+G9fYsJThWFAxXTbAcJmjshx+oYxVVd+gMM680hS0X1z37+FQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220607162504.7fd5a92a@canb.auug.org.au> <CALvZod5XBjw7MZfYSNv-UnE7pHMKTquUNomqyC5T05Qu_ef6Zw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALvZod4DhM00LXsPty=cnYyv3Ci5YS5otasu_tr9o7ujQekKLw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+G9fYve1faH7AmpEa-p_ySb_WCgc4DdjqyS6fSdiJYsaEi=rA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+G9fYve1faH7AmpEa-p_ySb_WCgc4DdjqyS6fSdiJYsaEi=rA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 7 Jun 2022 07:17:34 -0700
Message-ID: <CALvZod72bp9ejY+KghaUGkoXDrOMMbs_ofsopGib=MY4jzhRkg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [next] arm64: boot failed - next-20220606
To:     Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        regressions@lists.linux.dev, lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Raghuram Thammiraju <raghuram.thammiraju@arm.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
        Vasily Averin <vvs@openvz.org>,
        Qian Cai <quic_qiancai@quicinc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 3:28 AM Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Shakeel,
>
> > > > Can you test v5.19-rc1, please?  If that does not fail, then you could
> > > > bisect between that and next-20220606 ...
> > > >
> > >
> > > This is already reported at
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/Yp4F6n2Ie32re7Ed@qian/ and I think we know
> > > the underlying issue (which is calling virt_to_page() on a vmalloc
> > > address).
> >
> > Sorry, I might be wrong. Just checked the stacktrace again and it
> > seems like the failure is happening in early boot in this report.
> > Though the error "Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual
> > address" is happening in the function mem_cgroup_from_obj().
> >
> > Naresh, can you repro the issue if you revert the patch "net: set
> > proper memcg for net_init hooks allocations"?
>
> yes. You are right !
> 19ee3818b7c6 ("net: set proper memcg for net_init hooks allocations")
> After reverting this single commit I am able to boot arm64 successfully.
>
> Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
>

Can you please run script/faddr2line on "mem_cgroup_from_obj+0x2c/0x120"?