From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from xry111.site (xry111.site [89.208.246.23]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B44D03858C52 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2024 16:13:53 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org B44D03858C52 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=xry111.site Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xry111.site ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org B44D03858C52 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=89.208.246.23 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1706112834; cv=none; b=cgJhT1X5p66YZYmC0NgSR5mFksUhVYwuBo4RszShFzr/L+gRf5erLpEUn2AsnfGqczAOgpdx1250D5pf351YyJQWTN61N3jQPoDMO2W1mi3ZnaGEXy3TP23BJIKx8pb78fz1zxSxSpYCiJGSJmNj4gMoy/FpqGFZ8x3aGC9Mqlo= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1706112834; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+rReAANx2iYEhcc46qGz07QWQ4XTbUlAYD3+TJ2mY7I=; h=DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Date:MIME-Version; b=v/EX2T4PWC7atv/BilrmTo6rjpK3xLlH5NdmfVBYeso8/+9HRsXhveU28sg1e+k9r83uYZIW4pLHoW9fXNrp8dS0D8oQaiwpWaUdQhFum4XgW5MX69KNR0rUQDo7whEQskBgcnR2APoLsf9HPbH0I9VzeBZbfqjwu7TaOs43Wzo= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=xry111.site; s=default; t=1706112832; bh=+rReAANx2iYEhcc46qGz07QWQ4XTbUlAYD3+TJ2mY7I=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=eXRZqweJVlbCHlhCnvRrFOaqMIpPKjUVh2KH5bg9tYap0qGulTtYm8qIWwYyUMtqp ud8fBhW0GjfjEEOSZJqcBnp6phDkyjdOpSuoSuGfzqos7hRJfDKV5N6cjKh5RJb6lP kw2N+86ipI39NvZw5Gu6T6BQy9XxIhjvSdPchoa8= Received: from [IPv6:240e:358:113a:a00:dc73:854d:832e:5] (unknown [IPv6:240e:358:113a:a00:dc73:854d:832e:5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-384) server-digest SHA384) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: xry111@xry111.site) by xry111.site (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED182669C3; Wed, 24 Jan 2024 11:13:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <0be1203c9df55432548c92281c8392dfa2f7d6bf.camel@xry111.site> Subject: Re: Strange EFAULT on mips64el returned by syscall when another thread is forking From: Xi Ruoyao To: Andreas Schwab Cc: linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jiaxun Yang , Thomas Bogendoerfer , libc-alpha@sourceware.org Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 00:13:43 +0800 In-Reply-To: <9481b6d9d015aea25d8f2563bf7bd6f6462f758f.camel@xry111.site> References: <75e9fd7b08562ad9b456a5bdaacb7cc220311cc9.camel@xry111.site> <9481b6d9d015aea25d8f2563bf7bd6f6462f758f.camel@xry111.site> Autocrypt: addr=xry111@xry111.site; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata=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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.50.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,LIKELY_SPAM_FROM,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Wed, 2024-01-24 at 20:49 +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote: > On Wed, 2024-01-24 at 12:59 +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote: > > On Jan 24 2024, Xi Ruoyao wrote: > >=20 > > > Now I'm suspecting this might be a kernel bug.=C2=A0 Any pointer to f= urther > > > triage? > >=20 > > Is this a regression? >=20 > Initially I guessed it was perhaps a Glibc regression related to the > newly introduced clone3 usage on MIPS, but it fails with Glibc-2.35 too. >=20 > Not sure if this is a kernel regression, I'll try different kernels in > several hours (once I can physically access the system). Not happening with kernel 5.18.1. I can do a bisection but it will take several days, I guess. --=20 Xi Ruoyao School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University