panic in nfs on arm
Konstantin Belousov
kostikbel at gmail.com
Sun Oct 26 07:57:28 UTC 2014
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 07:21:13PM -0400, Rick Macklem wrote:
> Ronald Klop wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I got a panic on my arm computer while building a port with
> > /usr/ports
> > mounted from my FreeBSD-10-STABLE/amd64 machine.
> >
> > This is the machine which paniced:
> > FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #1 r272028M: Tue Sep 23 17:11:45 CEST 2014
> > root at sjakie.klop.ws:/usr/obj-arm/arm.arm/usr/src-arm/sys/SHEEVAPLUG
> > arm
> >
> >
> > Tracing pid 90295 tid 100119 td 0xc5f8c960
> > db_trace_self() at db_trace_self
> > pc = 0xc0bb12c8 lr = 0xc0bb1354 (db_trace_thread+0x50)
> > sp = 0xdf29e5d0 fp = 0xc3e07120
> > db_trace_thread() at db_trace_thread+0x50
> > pc = 0xc0bb1354 lr = 0xc0936314 (db_command_init+0x5a4)
> > sp = 0xdf29e630 fp = 0xc3e07120
> > db_command_init() at db_command_init+0x5a4
> > pc = 0xc0936314 lr = 0xc0935ad0 (db_skip_to_eol+0x484)
> > sp = 0xdf29e648 fp = 0xc3e07120
> > r4 = 0xc0c8d350 r5 = 0x00000000
> > db_skip_to_eol() at db_skip_to_eol+0x484
> > pc = 0xc0935ad0 lr = 0xc0935c38 (db_command_loop+0x5c)
> > sp = 0xdf29e6e8 fp = 0xc3e07120
> > r4 = 0xdf29e6fc r5 = 0xc0c8d64c
> > r6 = 0x3cd90e75 r7 = 0x00000000
> > r8 = 0x00000001 r10 = 0x600000d3
> > db_command_loop() at db_command_loop+0x5c
> > pc = 0xc0935c38 lr = 0xc0937f80 (X_db_sym_numargs+0xec)
> > sp = 0xdf29e6f0 fp = 0xc3e07120
> > X_db_sym_numargs() at X_db_sym_numargs+0xec
> > pc = 0xc0937f80 lr = 0xc0a6f0c0 (kdb_trap+0x94)
> > sp = 0xdf29e808 fp = 0xc3e07120
> > r4 = 0xdf29e8f8
> > kdb_trap() at kdb_trap+0x94
> > pc = 0xc0a6f0c0 lr = 0xc0bc1d60 (badaddr_read+0x274)
> > sp = 0xdf29e828 fp = 0xc3e07120
> > r4 = 0xdf29e8f8 r5 = 0x00000001
> > r6 = 0x3cd90e75 r7 = 0xc5f8c960
> > r8 = 0xdf29e8f8 r10 = 0xdf2a1eb0
> > badaddr_read() at badaddr_read+0x274
> > pc = 0xc0bc1d60 lr = 0xc0bc1e98 (badaddr_read+0x3ac)
> > sp = 0xdf29e840 fp = 0xc3e07120
> > r4 = 0xc5f8c960 r5 = 0xdf29e8f8
> > r6 = 0x3cd90e05
> > badaddr_read() at badaddr_read+0x3ac
> > pc = 0xc0bc1e98 lr = 0xc0bc2278 (data_abort_handler+0x10c)
> > sp = 0xdf29e858 fp = 0xc3e07120
> > r4 = 0xc0cd8af8 r5 = 0xffff1004
> > data_abort_handler() at data_abort_handler+0x10c
> > pc = 0xc0bc2278 lr = 0xc0bb2f40 (exception_exit)
> > sp = 0xdf29e8f8 fp = 0xc3e07120
> > r4 = 0xffffffff r5 = 0xffff1004
> > r6 = 0x3cd90e05 r7 = 0xc0e0ea48
> > r8 = 0x0000000f r9 = 0x00000101
> > r10 = 0x0000001d
> > exception_exit() at exception_exit
> > pc = 0xc0bb2f40 lr = 0xc0b8daf8 (uma_reclaim+0x1f8)
> > sp = 0xdf29e948 fp = 0xc3e07120
> > r0 = 0xba9b9127 r1 = 0x8b3de5fb
> > r2 = 0xc61c1fc8 r3 = 0xba9b9126
> > r4 = 0x00000000 r5 = 0xc61c1fc8
> > r6 = 0x3cd90e05 r7 = 0xc0e0ea48
> > r8 = 0x0000000f r9 = 0x00000101
> > r10 = 0x0000001d r12 = 0x00000000
> > uma_reclaim() at uma_reclaim+0x24c
> This looks to me like a crash in uma_reclaim() and I find UMA
> way too obscure to understand.
>
> I have no idea if it might be related, but alc@ put a fix for low
> memory situations in r272071 (or maybe it's r272221?).
>
> Might be worth trying a slightly newer kernel to see if the
> problem still occurs.
>
> And hopefully someone more conversant with UMA (or this stack
> trace) can help more.
>
> rick
>
> > pc = 0xc0b8db4c lr = 0xc0b8c800 (uma_zalloc_arg+0x2f0)
> > sp = 0xdf29e978 fp = 0xdf29ec10
> > r4 = 0xc3e071d8 r5 = 0xc0e0ea00
> > r6 = 0xc3e07120 r7 = 0x00000000
> > r8 = 0x00000102 r9 = 0xdf29ecf8
> > r10 = 0xc61c0760
> > uma_zalloc_arg() at uma_zalloc_arg+0x2f0
uma_reclaim() is not called from uma_zalloc().
I think there is some issue with ddb on arm, which means that
the backtrace is not useful. See below for one more.
> > pc = 0xc0b8c800 lr = 0xc09e1df0 (nfscl_nget+0x308)
> > sp = 0xdf29e990 fp = 0xdf29ec10
> > r4 = 0x9bb9fa43 r5 = 0x00000000
> > r6 = 0xc550dce8 r7 = 0xc3edaa00
> > r8 = 0xc3ebbac0
> > nfscl_nget() at nfscl_nget+0x308
> > pc = 0xc09e1df0 lr = 0xc09da69c (ncl_readlinkrpc+0xf60)
> > sp = 0xdf29e9d8 fp = 0xdf29ea10
> > r4 = 0xc550dce8 r5 = 0x00000000
> > r6 = 0xc550dcf8 r7 = 0xdf29ecf8
> > r8 = 0xdf29ec6c r9 = 0x00000000
> > r10 = 0xdf29ed28
> > ncl_readlinkrpc() at ncl_readlinkrpc+0xf60
> > pc = 0xc09da69c lr = 0xc0bdae44 (VOP_MKDIR_APV+0x94)
> > sp = 0xdf29ec40 fp = 0xbffff620
> > r4 = 0xc0c95c68 r5 = 0xdf29ec6c
> > r6 = 0x00000001 r7 = 0x00020284
> > r8 = 0xffffff9c r9 = 0x00200800
> > r10 = 0xc5f8c960
> > VOP_MKDIR_APV() at VOP_MKDIR_APV+0x94
I do not see how VOP_MKDIR() may end up calling ncl_readlinkrpc(),
esp. without intervening frame.
> > pc = 0xc0bdae44 lr = 0xc0aca614 (kern_mkdirat+0x18c)
> > sp = 0xdf29ec50 fp = 0xbffff620
> > r4 = 0xdf29ed28 r5 = 0xdf29ec90
> > r6 = 0x00000000
> > kern_mkdirat() at kern_mkdirat+0x18c
> > pc = 0xc0aca614 lr = 0xc0aca684 (kern_mkdir+0x24)
> > sp = 0xdf29ede0 fp = 0xbffff620
> > r4 = 0x00020290 r5 = 0xc5f8c960
> > r6 = 0x00000000 r7 = 0xc5f7f000
> > r8 = 0x00000000 r10 = 0x00013640
> > kern_mkdir() at kern_mkdir+0x24
> > pc = 0xc0aca684 lr = 0xc0aca6a8 (sys_mkdir+0x1c)
> > sp = 0xdf29edf0 fp = 0xbffff620
> > sys_mkdir() at sys_mkdir+0x1c
> > pc = 0xc0aca6a8 lr = 0xc0bc2884 (swi_handler+0x254)
> > sp = 0xdf29edf8 fp = 0xbffff620
> > swi_handler() at swi_handler+0x254
> > pc = 0xc0bc2884 lr = 0xc0bb2ed0 (swi_exit)
> > sp = 0xdf29ee60 fp = 0xbffff620
> > r4 = 0x00020290 r5 = 0x2085e8e0
> > r6 = 0x00020284 r7 = 0x00000088
> > r8 = 0x00000001
> > swi_exit() at swi_exit
> > pc = 0xc0bb2ed0 lr = 0xc0bb2ed0 (swi_exit)
> > sp = 0xdf29ee60 fp = 0xbffff620
> > Unable to unwind further
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately dumping the kernel core also paniced.
> > db> dump
> > Physical memory: 507 MB
> > Dumping 74 MB: 71 67 63
> > vm_fault(0xc4147000, 0, 1, 0) -> 0
> > Fatal kernel mode data abort: 'Translation Fault (P)'
> > trapframe: 0xdf29e0b8
> > FSR=00000017, FAR=00000014, spsr=a00000d3
> > r0 =c0cd0f40, r1 =00000000, r2 =c5f8c960, r3 =00000004
> > r4 =00000000, r5 =00000000, r6 =00000000, r7 =c3ead01c
> > r8 =c3ead000, r9 =c3e9e88c, r10=00000000, r11=0000000a
> > r12=600000d3, ssp=df29e108, slr=c0bb4e24, pc =c0a7d060
> >
> > panic: Fatal abort
> > Uptime: 3d18h30m32s
> > Sleeping thread (tid 100119, pid 90295) owns a non-sleepable lock
> > _______________________________________________
> > freebsd-fs at freebsd.org mailing list
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> >
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-fs at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-fs
mailing list