Re: [BUG 3.12.rc4] Oops: unable to handle kernel paging request during shutdown

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Friday, October 25, 2013 10:02:22 AM Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Adding more people, so quoting the whole email for them.
> 
> We definitely have some module unload issues. Guys, try the following
> a few times to unload modules:
> 
>     lsmod | grep ' 0 '| cut -d' ' -f1 | xargs sudo rmmod
> 
> (a few times because unloading one module will then potentially make
> other modules unloadable).
> 
> On my machine, I can trigger this, for example:
> 
>   ------------[ cut here ]------------
>   WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 3217 at fs/sysfs/file.c:498 sysfs_attr_ns+0x91/0xa0()
>   sysfs: kobject (null) without dirent
>   Modules linked in: fuse nf_conntrack_broadcast ipt_MASQUERADE ip6t_REJECT xt_$
>   CPU: 0 PID: 3217 Comm: rmmod Not tainted 3.12.0-rc6-00284-ge6036c0b8896 #19
>   Hardware name: Sony Corporation SVP11213CXB/VAIO, BIOS R0270V7 05/17/2013
>    0000000000000009 ffff8800aca35df8 ffffffff8160aab5 ffff8800aca35e40
>    ffff8800aca35e30 ffffffff810514b8 ffffffffa013f080 ffff8801194a6040
>    0000000000000800 0000000000000000 0000000000c5b3e0 ffff8800aca35e90
>   Call Trace:
>    [<ffffffff8160aab5>] dump_stack+0x45/0x56
>    [<ffffffff810514b8>] warn_slowpath_common+0x78/0xa0
>    [<ffffffff81051527>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x47/0x50
>    [<ffffffff810b5960>] ? module_refcount+0xb0/0xb0
>    [<ffffffff811e5c61>] sysfs_attr_ns+0x91/0xa0
>    [<ffffffff811e5d2a>] sysfs_remove_file+0x1a/0x50
>    [<ffffffff814c88a3>] cpufreq_sysfs_remove_file+0x13/0x30
>    [<ffffffffa013d350>] acpi_cpufreq_exit+0x2e/0xcde [acpi_cpufreq]
>    [<ffffffff810b7d1d>] SyS_delete_module+0x15d/0x2c0
>    [<ffffffff81002929>] ? do_notify_resume+0x59/0x90
>    [<ffffffff81618f62>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>   ---[ end trace f887112caaa5c4ab ]---
> 
> so at least we have a cpufreq/sysfs interaction bug. There may be others.
> 
> This particular cpufreq issue may be triggered by the fact that
> acpi-cpufreq isn't actually in use (pstate is). Or it might be some
> generic cpufreq/sysfs bug. Rafael, Greg, ideas?

I *think* that this indeed is related to acpi-cpufreq being unused.  That said,
we've been fixing sysfs-related bugs in cpufreq recently and we may have
overlooked something.

I'll have a deeper look at that.

Rafael

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/