still Bluetooth TX timeout with 3.6.10 #174
Comments
|
I've added this patch to the latest "next" firmware. |
|
You said you'd test and report back? Please close if happy |
|
I forgot about it. |
anholt
pushed a commit
to anholt/linux
that referenced
this issue
Feb 20, 2019
…_ctx Delay the drm_modeset_acquire_init() until after we check for an allocation failure so that we can return immediately upon error without having to unwind. WARNING: lock held when returning to user space! 4.20.0+ raspberrypi#174 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------ syz-executor556/8153 is leaving the kernel with locks still held! 1 lock held by syz-executor556/8153: #0: 000000005100c85c (crtc_ww_class_acquire){+.+.}, at: set_property_atomic+0xb3/0x330 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mode_object.c:462 Reported-by: [email protected] Fixes: 144a799 ("drm: Handle properties in the core for atomic drivers") Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]> Cc: Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <[email protected]> Cc: Sean Paul <[email protected]> Cc: David Airlie <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]> # v4.14+ Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <[email protected]> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/[email protected]
popcornmix
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Apr 2, 2019
…_ctx commit 227ad6d upstream. Delay the drm_modeset_acquire_init() until after we check for an allocation failure so that we can return immediately upon error without having to unwind. WARNING: lock held when returning to user space! 4.20.0+ #174 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------ syz-executor556/8153 is leaving the kernel with locks still held! 1 lock held by syz-executor556/8153: #0: 000000005100c85c (crtc_ww_class_acquire){+.+.}, at: set_property_atomic+0xb3/0x330 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mode_object.c:462 Reported-by: [email protected] Fixes: 144a799 ("drm: Handle properties in the core for atomic drivers") Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]> Cc: Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <[email protected]> Cc: Sean Paul <[email protected]> Cc: David Airlie <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]> # v4.14+ Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <[email protected]> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
popcornmix
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Apr 8, 2019
…_ctx [ Upstream commit 227ad6d ] Delay the drm_modeset_acquire_init() until after we check for an allocation failure so that we can return immediately upon error without having to unwind. WARNING: lock held when returning to user space! 4.20.0+ #174 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------ syz-executor556/8153 is leaving the kernel with locks still held! 1 lock held by syz-executor556/8153: #0: 000000005100c85c (crtc_ww_class_acquire){+.+.}, at: set_property_atomic+0xb3/0x330 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mode_object.c:462 Reported-by: [email protected] Fixes: 144a799 ("drm: Handle properties in the core for atomic drivers") Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]> Cc: Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <[email protected]> Cc: Sean Paul <[email protected]> Cc: David Airlie <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]> # v4.14+ Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <[email protected]> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
popcornmix
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 19, 2021
[ Upstream commit 0f20615 ] Fix BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD() macro used for reading CO-RE-relocatable bitfields. Missing breaks in a switch caused 8-byte reads always. This can confuse libbpf because it does strict checks that memory load size corresponds to the original size of the field, which in this case quite often would be wrong. After fixing that, we run into another problem, which quite subtle, so worth documenting here. The issue is in Clang optimization and CO-RE relocation interactions. Without that asm volatile construct (also known as barrier_var()), Clang will re-order BYTE_OFFSET and BYTE_SIZE relocations and will apply BYTE_OFFSET 4 times for each switch case arm. This will result in the same error from libbpf about mismatch of memory load size and original field size. I.e., if we were reading u32, we'd still have *(u8 *), *(u16 *), *(u32 *), and *(u64 *) memory loads, three of which will fail. Using barrier_var() forces Clang to apply BYTE_OFFSET relocation first (and once) to calculate p, after which value of p is used without relocation in each of switch case arms, doing appropiately-sized memory load. Here's the list of relevant relocations and pieces of generated BPF code before and after this patch for test_core_reloc_bitfields_direct selftests. BEFORE ===== #45: core_reloc: insn #160 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #46: core_reloc: insn #167 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #47: core_reloc: insn #174 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #48: core_reloc: insn #178 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #49: core_reloc: insn #182 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 157: 18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll 159: 7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1 160: b7 02 00 00 04 00 00 00 r2 = 4 ; BYTE_SIZE relocation here ^^^ 161: 66 02 07 00 03 00 00 00 if w2 s> 3 goto +7 <LBB0_63> 162: 16 02 0d 00 01 00 00 00 if w2 == 1 goto +13 <LBB0_65> 163: 16 02 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w2 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66> 164: 05 00 12 00 00 00 00 00 goto +18 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000528 <LBB0_66>: 165: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll 167: 69 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r1 + 8) ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 168: 05 00 0e 00 00 00 00 00 goto +14 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000548 <LBB0_63>: 169: 16 02 0a 00 04 00 00 00 if w2 == 4 goto +10 <LBB0_67> 170: 16 02 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w2 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68> 171: 05 00 0b 00 00 00 00 00 goto +11 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000560 <LBB0_68>: 172: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll 174: 79 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8) ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 175: 05 00 07 00 00 00 00 00 goto +7 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000580 <LBB0_65>: 176: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll 178: 71 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r1 + 8) ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 179: 05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69> 00000000000005a0 <LBB0_67>: 180: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll 182: 61 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 8) ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ RIGHT size ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 00000000000005b8 <LBB0_69>: 183: 67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32 184: b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 185: 16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71> 186: c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32 187: 05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72> 00000000000005e0 <LBB0_71>: 188: 77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 32 AFTER ===== #30: core_reloc: insn #132 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #31: core_reloc: insn #134 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 129: 18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll 131: 7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1 132: b7 01 00 00 08 00 00 00 r1 = 8 ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here ^^^ ; no size check for non-memory dereferencing instructions 133: 0f 12 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 += r1 134: b7 03 00 00 04 00 00 00 r3 = 4 ; BYTE_SIZE relocation here ^^^ 135: 66 03 05 00 03 00 00 00 if w3 s> 3 goto +5 <LBB0_63> 136: 16 03 09 00 01 00 00 00 if w3 == 1 goto +9 <LBB0_65> 137: 16 03 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w3 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66> 138: 05 00 0a 00 00 00 00 00 goto +10 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000458 <LBB0_66>: 139: 69 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r2 + 0) ; NO CO-RE relocation here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 140: 05 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 goto +8 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000468 <LBB0_63>: 141: 16 03 06 00 04 00 00 00 if w3 == 4 goto +6 <LBB0_67> 142: 16 03 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w3 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68> 143: 05 00 05 00 00 00 00 00 goto +5 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000480 <LBB0_68>: 144: 79 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r2 + 0) ; NO CO-RE relocation here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 145: 05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000490 <LBB0_65>: 146: 71 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 + 0) ; NO CO-RE relocation here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 147: 05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_69> 00000000000004a0 <LBB0_67>: 148: 61 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r2 + 0) ; NO CO-RE relocation here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 00000000000004a8 <LBB0_69>: 149: 67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32 150: b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 151: 16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71> 152: c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32 153: 05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72> 00000000000004d0 <LBB0_71>: 154: 77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 323 Fixes: ee26dad ("libbpf: Add support for relocatable bitfields") Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]> Acked-by: Lorenz Bauer <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
popcornmix
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 19, 2021
[ Upstream commit 0f20615 ] Fix BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD() macro used for reading CO-RE-relocatable bitfields. Missing breaks in a switch caused 8-byte reads always. This can confuse libbpf because it does strict checks that memory load size corresponds to the original size of the field, which in this case quite often would be wrong. After fixing that, we run into another problem, which quite subtle, so worth documenting here. The issue is in Clang optimization and CO-RE relocation interactions. Without that asm volatile construct (also known as barrier_var()), Clang will re-order BYTE_OFFSET and BYTE_SIZE relocations and will apply BYTE_OFFSET 4 times for each switch case arm. This will result in the same error from libbpf about mismatch of memory load size and original field size. I.e., if we were reading u32, we'd still have *(u8 *), *(u16 *), *(u32 *), and *(u64 *) memory loads, three of which will fail. Using barrier_var() forces Clang to apply BYTE_OFFSET relocation first (and once) to calculate p, after which value of p is used without relocation in each of switch case arms, doing appropiately-sized memory load. Here's the list of relevant relocations and pieces of generated BPF code before and after this patch for test_core_reloc_bitfields_direct selftests. BEFORE ===== #45: core_reloc: insn #160 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #46: core_reloc: insn #167 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #47: core_reloc: insn #174 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #48: core_reloc: insn #178 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #49: core_reloc: insn #182 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 157: 18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll 159: 7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1 160: b7 02 00 00 04 00 00 00 r2 = 4 ; BYTE_SIZE relocation here ^^^ 161: 66 02 07 00 03 00 00 00 if w2 s> 3 goto +7 <LBB0_63> 162: 16 02 0d 00 01 00 00 00 if w2 == 1 goto +13 <LBB0_65> 163: 16 02 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w2 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66> 164: 05 00 12 00 00 00 00 00 goto +18 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000528 <LBB0_66>: 165: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll 167: 69 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r1 + 8) ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 168: 05 00 0e 00 00 00 00 00 goto +14 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000548 <LBB0_63>: 169: 16 02 0a 00 04 00 00 00 if w2 == 4 goto +10 <LBB0_67> 170: 16 02 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w2 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68> 171: 05 00 0b 00 00 00 00 00 goto +11 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000560 <LBB0_68>: 172: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll 174: 79 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8) ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 175: 05 00 07 00 00 00 00 00 goto +7 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000580 <LBB0_65>: 176: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll 178: 71 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r1 + 8) ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 179: 05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69> 00000000000005a0 <LBB0_67>: 180: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll 182: 61 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 8) ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ RIGHT size ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 00000000000005b8 <LBB0_69>: 183: 67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32 184: b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 185: 16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71> 186: c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32 187: 05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72> 00000000000005e0 <LBB0_71>: 188: 77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 32 AFTER ===== #30: core_reloc: insn #132 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #31: core_reloc: insn #134 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 129: 18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll 131: 7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1 132: b7 01 00 00 08 00 00 00 r1 = 8 ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here ^^^ ; no size check for non-memory dereferencing instructions 133: 0f 12 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 += r1 134: b7 03 00 00 04 00 00 00 r3 = 4 ; BYTE_SIZE relocation here ^^^ 135: 66 03 05 00 03 00 00 00 if w3 s> 3 goto +5 <LBB0_63> 136: 16 03 09 00 01 00 00 00 if w3 == 1 goto +9 <LBB0_65> 137: 16 03 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w3 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66> 138: 05 00 0a 00 00 00 00 00 goto +10 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000458 <LBB0_66>: 139: 69 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r2 + 0) ; NO CO-RE relocation here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 140: 05 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 goto +8 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000468 <LBB0_63>: 141: 16 03 06 00 04 00 00 00 if w3 == 4 goto +6 <LBB0_67> 142: 16 03 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w3 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68> 143: 05 00 05 00 00 00 00 00 goto +5 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000480 <LBB0_68>: 144: 79 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r2 + 0) ; NO CO-RE relocation here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 145: 05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000490 <LBB0_65>: 146: 71 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 + 0) ; NO CO-RE relocation here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 147: 05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_69> 00000000000004a0 <LBB0_67>: 148: 61 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r2 + 0) ; NO CO-RE relocation here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 00000000000004a8 <LBB0_69>: 149: 67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32 150: b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 151: 16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71> 152: c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32 153: 05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72> 00000000000004d0 <LBB0_71>: 154: 77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 323 Fixes: ee26dad ("libbpf: Add support for relocatable bitfields") Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]> Acked-by: Lorenz Bauer <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
popcornmix
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 19, 2021
[ Upstream commit 0f20615 ] Fix BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD() macro used for reading CO-RE-relocatable bitfields. Missing breaks in a switch caused 8-byte reads always. This can confuse libbpf because it does strict checks that memory load size corresponds to the original size of the field, which in this case quite often would be wrong. After fixing that, we run into another problem, which quite subtle, so worth documenting here. The issue is in Clang optimization and CO-RE relocation interactions. Without that asm volatile construct (also known as barrier_var()), Clang will re-order BYTE_OFFSET and BYTE_SIZE relocations and will apply BYTE_OFFSET 4 times for each switch case arm. This will result in the same error from libbpf about mismatch of memory load size and original field size. I.e., if we were reading u32, we'd still have *(u8 *), *(u16 *), *(u32 *), and *(u64 *) memory loads, three of which will fail. Using barrier_var() forces Clang to apply BYTE_OFFSET relocation first (and once) to calculate p, after which value of p is used without relocation in each of switch case arms, doing appropiately-sized memory load. Here's the list of relevant relocations and pieces of generated BPF code before and after this patch for test_core_reloc_bitfields_direct selftests. BEFORE ===== #45: core_reloc: insn #160 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #46: core_reloc: insn #167 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #47: core_reloc: insn #174 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #48: core_reloc: insn #178 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #49: core_reloc: insn #182 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 157: 18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll 159: 7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1 160: b7 02 00 00 04 00 00 00 r2 = 4 ; BYTE_SIZE relocation here ^^^ 161: 66 02 07 00 03 00 00 00 if w2 s> 3 goto +7 <LBB0_63> 162: 16 02 0d 00 01 00 00 00 if w2 == 1 goto +13 <LBB0_65> 163: 16 02 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w2 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66> 164: 05 00 12 00 00 00 00 00 goto +18 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000528 <LBB0_66>: 165: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll 167: 69 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r1 + 8) ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 168: 05 00 0e 00 00 00 00 00 goto +14 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000548 <LBB0_63>: 169: 16 02 0a 00 04 00 00 00 if w2 == 4 goto +10 <LBB0_67> 170: 16 02 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w2 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68> 171: 05 00 0b 00 00 00 00 00 goto +11 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000560 <LBB0_68>: 172: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll 174: 79 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8) ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 175: 05 00 07 00 00 00 00 00 goto +7 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000580 <LBB0_65>: 176: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll 178: 71 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r1 + 8) ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 179: 05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69> 00000000000005a0 <LBB0_67>: 180: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll 182: 61 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 8) ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ RIGHT size ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 00000000000005b8 <LBB0_69>: 183: 67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32 184: b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 185: 16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71> 186: c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32 187: 05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72> 00000000000005e0 <LBB0_71>: 188: 77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 32 AFTER ===== #30: core_reloc: insn #132 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 #31: core_reloc: insn #134 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32 129: 18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll 131: 7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1 132: b7 01 00 00 08 00 00 00 r1 = 8 ; BYTE_OFFSET relo here ^^^ ; no size check for non-memory dereferencing instructions 133: 0f 12 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 += r1 134: b7 03 00 00 04 00 00 00 r3 = 4 ; BYTE_SIZE relocation here ^^^ 135: 66 03 05 00 03 00 00 00 if w3 s> 3 goto +5 <LBB0_63> 136: 16 03 09 00 01 00 00 00 if w3 == 1 goto +9 <LBB0_65> 137: 16 03 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w3 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66> 138: 05 00 0a 00 00 00 00 00 goto +10 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000458 <LBB0_66>: 139: 69 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r2 + 0) ; NO CO-RE relocation here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 140: 05 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 goto +8 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000468 <LBB0_63>: 141: 16 03 06 00 04 00 00 00 if w3 == 4 goto +6 <LBB0_67> 142: 16 03 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w3 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68> 143: 05 00 05 00 00 00 00 00 goto +5 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000480 <LBB0_68>: 144: 79 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r2 + 0) ; NO CO-RE relocation here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 145: 05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69> 0000000000000490 <LBB0_65>: 146: 71 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 + 0) ; NO CO-RE relocation here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 147: 05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_69> 00000000000004a0 <LBB0_67>: 148: 61 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r2 + 0) ; NO CO-RE relocation here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 00000000000004a8 <LBB0_69>: 149: 67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32 150: b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 151: 16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71> 152: c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32 153: 05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72> 00000000000004d0 <LBB0_71>: 154: 77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 323 Fixes: ee26dad ("libbpf: Add support for relocatable bitfields") Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]> Acked-by: Lorenz Bauer <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Since forever I have my PIs the bluetooth module is crashing. This topic is discussed but still not fixed in 3.6.10. I changed to 3.6.10 in the hope the errors would be fixed. But I still get different Bluetooth: hci0 command 0x**** tx timeout messages and the bluetooth module is not working anymore until a reboot..
I suggest that the following patch is applied, which seems to me a possible solution:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-bluetooth/msg31626.html
I will gladly test it and report back after a new firmware was compiled from it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: