2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-09-20 17:31:38 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-09-20 17:31:38 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-07-10 23:05:25 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-07-26 14:53:53 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-09-27 22:29:37 +04:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-05-12 18:28:57 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-05-12 18:28:57 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-09-20 16:05:11 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-05-12 18:28:57 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:13 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2010-05-12 18:28:57 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:13 +09:00
|
|
|
|
sysfs: fix deadlock
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:27:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> and it's working fine on most boxes. One testbox found this new locking
> scenario:
>
> PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa7
> EDAC DEBUG: MC0: i82860_check()
>
> =======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> -------------------------------------------------------
> X/4873 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&bb->mutex){--..}, at: [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>
> -> #1 (&mm->mmap_sem){----}:
> [<c017dc96>] validate_chain+0xa96/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c01aa8fb>] might_fault+0x6b/0x90
> [<c040b618>] copy_to_user+0x38/0x60
> [<c020bcfb>] read+0xfb/0x170
> [<c01c09a5>] vfs_read+0x95/0x110
> [<c01c1443>] sys_pread64+0x63/0x80
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> -> #0 (&bb->mutex){--..}:
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> 1 lock held by X/4873:
> #0: (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 4873, comm: X Not tainted 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> [<c017cd09>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x79/0xc0
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017a5b5>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x15/0xb0
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01afb88>] ? arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown+0xf8/0x160
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<c0120000>] ? __switch_to+0x130/0x220
> =======================
> evbug.c: Event. Dev: input3, Type: 20, Code: 0, Value: 500
> warning: `sudo' uses deprecated v2 capabilities in a way that may be insecure.
>
> i've attached the config.
>
> at first sight it looks like a genuine bug in fs/sysfs/bin.c?
Yes, it is a real bug by the looks. bin.c takes bb->mutex under mmap_sem
when it is mmapped, and then does its copy_*_user under bb->mutex too.
Here is a basic fix for the sysfs lor.
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2008-09-12 11:24:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-01-20 15:51:16 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sysfs: fix deadlock
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:27:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> and it's working fine on most boxes. One testbox found this new locking
> scenario:
>
> PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa7
> EDAC DEBUG: MC0: i82860_check()
>
> =======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> -------------------------------------------------------
> X/4873 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&bb->mutex){--..}, at: [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>
> -> #1 (&mm->mmap_sem){----}:
> [<c017dc96>] validate_chain+0xa96/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c01aa8fb>] might_fault+0x6b/0x90
> [<c040b618>] copy_to_user+0x38/0x60
> [<c020bcfb>] read+0xfb/0x170
> [<c01c09a5>] vfs_read+0x95/0x110
> [<c01c1443>] sys_pread64+0x63/0x80
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> -> #0 (&bb->mutex){--..}:
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> 1 lock held by X/4873:
> #0: (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 4873, comm: X Not tainted 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> [<c017cd09>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x79/0xc0
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017a5b5>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x15/0xb0
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01afb88>] ? arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown+0xf8/0x160
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<c0120000>] ? __switch_to+0x130/0x220
> =======================
> evbug.c: Event. Dev: input3, Type: 20, Code: 0, Value: 500
> warning: `sudo' uses deprecated v2 capabilities in a way that may be insecure.
>
> i've attached the config.
>
> at first sight it looks like a genuine bug in fs/sysfs/bin.c?
Yes, it is a real bug by the looks. bin.c takes bb->mutex under mmap_sem
when it is mmapped, and then does its copy_*_user under bb->mutex too.
Here is a basic fix for the sysfs lor.
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2008-09-12 11:24:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-05-12 18:28:57 -07:00
|
|
|
|
sysfs: fix deadlock
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:27:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> and it's working fine on most boxes. One testbox found this new locking
> scenario:
>
> PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa7
> EDAC DEBUG: MC0: i82860_check()
>
> =======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> -------------------------------------------------------
> X/4873 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&bb->mutex){--..}, at: [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>
> -> #1 (&mm->mmap_sem){----}:
> [<c017dc96>] validate_chain+0xa96/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c01aa8fb>] might_fault+0x6b/0x90
> [<c040b618>] copy_to_user+0x38/0x60
> [<c020bcfb>] read+0xfb/0x170
> [<c01c09a5>] vfs_read+0x95/0x110
> [<c01c1443>] sys_pread64+0x63/0x80
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> -> #0 (&bb->mutex){--..}:
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> 1 lock held by X/4873:
> #0: (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 4873, comm: X Not tainted 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> [<c017cd09>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x79/0xc0
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017a5b5>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x15/0xb0
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01afb88>] ? arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown+0xf8/0x160
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<c0120000>] ? __switch_to+0x130/0x220
> =======================
> evbug.c: Event. Dev: input3, Type: 20, Code: 0, Value: 500
> warning: `sudo' uses deprecated v2 capabilities in a way that may be insecure.
>
> i've attached the config.
>
> at first sight it looks like a genuine bug in fs/sysfs/bin.c?
Yes, it is a real bug by the looks. bin.c takes bb->mutex under mmap_sem
when it is mmapped, and then does its copy_*_user under bb->mutex too.
Here is a basic fix for the sysfs lor.
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2008-09-12 11:24:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
sysfs: fix deadlock
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:27:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> and it's working fine on most boxes. One testbox found this new locking
> scenario:
>
> PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa7
> EDAC DEBUG: MC0: i82860_check()
>
> =======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> -------------------------------------------------------
> X/4873 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&bb->mutex){--..}, at: [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>
> -> #1 (&mm->mmap_sem){----}:
> [<c017dc96>] validate_chain+0xa96/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c01aa8fb>] might_fault+0x6b/0x90
> [<c040b618>] copy_to_user+0x38/0x60
> [<c020bcfb>] read+0xfb/0x170
> [<c01c09a5>] vfs_read+0x95/0x110
> [<c01c1443>] sys_pread64+0x63/0x80
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> -> #0 (&bb->mutex){--..}:
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> 1 lock held by X/4873:
> #0: (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 4873, comm: X Not tainted 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> [<c017cd09>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x79/0xc0
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017a5b5>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x15/0xb0
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01afb88>] ? arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown+0xf8/0x160
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<c0120000>] ? __switch_to+0x130/0x220
> =======================
> evbug.c: Event. Dev: input3, Type: 20, Code: 0, Value: 500
> warning: `sudo' uses deprecated v2 capabilities in a way that may be insecure.
>
> i've attached the config.
>
> at first sight it looks like a genuine bug in fs/sysfs/bin.c?
Yes, it is a real bug by the looks. bin.c takes bb->mutex under mmap_sem
when it is mmapped, and then does its copy_*_user under bb->mutex too.
Here is a basic fix for the sysfs lor.
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2008-09-12 11:24:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
sysfs: fix deadlock
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:27:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> and it's working fine on most boxes. One testbox found this new locking
> scenario:
>
> PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa7
> EDAC DEBUG: MC0: i82860_check()
>
> =======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> -------------------------------------------------------
> X/4873 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&bb->mutex){--..}, at: [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>
> -> #1 (&mm->mmap_sem){----}:
> [<c017dc96>] validate_chain+0xa96/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c01aa8fb>] might_fault+0x6b/0x90
> [<c040b618>] copy_to_user+0x38/0x60
> [<c020bcfb>] read+0xfb/0x170
> [<c01c09a5>] vfs_read+0x95/0x110
> [<c01c1443>] sys_pread64+0x63/0x80
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> -> #0 (&bb->mutex){--..}:
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> 1 lock held by X/4873:
> #0: (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 4873, comm: X Not tainted 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> [<c017cd09>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x79/0xc0
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017a5b5>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x15/0xb0
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01afb88>] ? arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown+0xf8/0x160
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<c0120000>] ? __switch_to+0x130/0x220
> =======================
> evbug.c: Event. Dev: input3, Type: 20, Code: 0, Value: 500
> warning: `sudo' uses deprecated v2 capabilities in a way that may be insecure.
>
> i've attached the config.
>
> at first sight it looks like a genuine bug in fs/sysfs/bin.c?
Yes, it is a real bug by the looks. bin.c takes bb->mutex under mmap_sem
when it is mmapped, and then does its copy_*_user under bb->mutex too.
Here is a basic fix for the sysfs lor.
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2008-09-12 11:24:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:13 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sysfs: fix deadlock
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:27:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> and it's working fine on most boxes. One testbox found this new locking
> scenario:
>
> PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa7
> EDAC DEBUG: MC0: i82860_check()
>
> =======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> -------------------------------------------------------
> X/4873 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&bb->mutex){--..}, at: [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>
> -> #1 (&mm->mmap_sem){----}:
> [<c017dc96>] validate_chain+0xa96/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c01aa8fb>] might_fault+0x6b/0x90
> [<c040b618>] copy_to_user+0x38/0x60
> [<c020bcfb>] read+0xfb/0x170
> [<c01c09a5>] vfs_read+0x95/0x110
> [<c01c1443>] sys_pread64+0x63/0x80
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> -> #0 (&bb->mutex){--..}:
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> 1 lock held by X/4873:
> #0: (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 4873, comm: X Not tainted 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> [<c017cd09>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x79/0xc0
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017a5b5>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x15/0xb0
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01afb88>] ? arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown+0xf8/0x160
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<c0120000>] ? __switch_to+0x130/0x220
> =======================
> evbug.c: Event. Dev: input3, Type: 20, Code: 0, Value: 500
> warning: `sudo' uses deprecated v2 capabilities in a way that may be insecure.
>
> i've attached the config.
>
> at first sight it looks like a genuine bug in fs/sysfs/bin.c?
Yes, it is a real bug by the looks. bin.c takes bb->mutex under mmap_sem
when it is mmapped, and then does its copy_*_user under bb->mutex too.
Here is a basic fix for the sysfs lor.
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2008-09-12 11:24:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-05-12 18:28:57 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-05-12 18:28:57 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-09-20 16:05:11 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-05-12 18:28:57 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:13 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2010-05-12 18:28:57 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:13 +09:00
|
|
|
|
sysfs: fix deadlock
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:27:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> and it's working fine on most boxes. One testbox found this new locking
> scenario:
>
> PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa7
> EDAC DEBUG: MC0: i82860_check()
>
> =======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> -------------------------------------------------------
> X/4873 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&bb->mutex){--..}, at: [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>
> -> #1 (&mm->mmap_sem){----}:
> [<c017dc96>] validate_chain+0xa96/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c01aa8fb>] might_fault+0x6b/0x90
> [<c040b618>] copy_to_user+0x38/0x60
> [<c020bcfb>] read+0xfb/0x170
> [<c01c09a5>] vfs_read+0x95/0x110
> [<c01c1443>] sys_pread64+0x63/0x80
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> -> #0 (&bb->mutex){--..}:
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> 1 lock held by X/4873:
> #0: (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 4873, comm: X Not tainted 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> [<c017cd09>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x79/0xc0
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017a5b5>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x15/0xb0
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01afb88>] ? arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown+0xf8/0x160
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<c0120000>] ? __switch_to+0x130/0x220
> =======================
> evbug.c: Event. Dev: input3, Type: 20, Code: 0, Value: 500
> warning: `sudo' uses deprecated v2 capabilities in a way that may be insecure.
>
> i've attached the config.
>
> at first sight it looks like a genuine bug in fs/sysfs/bin.c?
Yes, it is a real bug by the looks. bin.c takes bb->mutex under mmap_sem
when it is mmapped, and then does its copy_*_user under bb->mutex too.
Here is a basic fix for the sysfs lor.
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2008-09-12 11:24:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-01-20 15:51:16 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-04-08 15:07:30 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
sysfs: fix deadlock
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:27:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> and it's working fine on most boxes. One testbox found this new locking
> scenario:
>
> PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa7
> EDAC DEBUG: MC0: i82860_check()
>
> =======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> -------------------------------------------------------
> X/4873 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&bb->mutex){--..}, at: [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>
> -> #1 (&mm->mmap_sem){----}:
> [<c017dc96>] validate_chain+0xa96/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c01aa8fb>] might_fault+0x6b/0x90
> [<c040b618>] copy_to_user+0x38/0x60
> [<c020bcfb>] read+0xfb/0x170
> [<c01c09a5>] vfs_read+0x95/0x110
> [<c01c1443>] sys_pread64+0x63/0x80
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> -> #0 (&bb->mutex){--..}:
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> 1 lock held by X/4873:
> #0: (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 4873, comm: X Not tainted 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> [<c017cd09>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x79/0xc0
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017a5b5>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x15/0xb0
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01afb88>] ? arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown+0xf8/0x160
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<c0120000>] ? __switch_to+0x130/0x220
> =======================
> evbug.c: Event. Dev: input3, Type: 20, Code: 0, Value: 500
> warning: `sudo' uses deprecated v2 capabilities in a way that may be insecure.
>
> i've attached the config.
>
> at first sight it looks like a genuine bug in fs/sysfs/bin.c?
Yes, it is a real bug by the looks. bin.c takes bb->mutex under mmap_sem
when it is mmapped, and then does its copy_*_user under bb->mutex too.
Here is a basic fix for the sysfs lor.
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2008-09-12 11:24:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-05-12 18:28:57 -07:00
|
|
|
|
sysfs: fix deadlock
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:27:10AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> and it's working fine on most boxes. One testbox found this new locking
> scenario:
>
> PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa7
> EDAC DEBUG: MC0: i82860_check()
>
> =======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> -------------------------------------------------------
> X/4873 is trying to acquire lock:
> (&bb->mutex){--..}, at: [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>
> -> #1 (&mm->mmap_sem){----}:
> [<c017dc96>] validate_chain+0xa96/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c01aa8fb>] might_fault+0x6b/0x90
> [<c040b618>] copy_to_user+0x38/0x60
> [<c020bcfb>] read+0xfb/0x170
> [<c01c09a5>] vfs_read+0x95/0x110
> [<c01c1443>] sys_pread64+0x63/0x80
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> -> #0 (&bb->mutex){--..}:
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> 1 lock held by X/4873:
> #0: (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c0125a1e>] sys_mmap2+0x8e/0xc0
>
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 4873, comm: X Not tainted 2.6.27-rc6-tip #1
> [<c017cd09>] print_circular_bug_tail+0x79/0xc0
> [<c017d8b7>] validate_chain+0x6b7/0xf50
> [<c017a5b5>] ? trace_hardirqs_off_caller+0x15/0xb0
> [<c017ef2b>] __lock_acquire+0x2cb/0x5b0
> [<c017f299>] lock_acquire+0x89/0xc0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f2ab>] __mutex_lock_common+0xab/0x3c0
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c0d6f698>] mutex_lock_nested+0x38/0x50
> [<c020ba20>] ? mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c020ba20>] mmap+0x40/0xa0
> [<c01b111e>] mmap_region+0x14e/0x450
> [<c01afb88>] ? arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown+0xf8/0x160
> [<c01b170f>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x2ef/0x310
> [<c0125a3d>] sys_mmap2+0xad/0xc0
> [<c012146f>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x43
> [<c0120000>] ? __switch_to+0x130/0x220
> =======================
> evbug.c: Event. Dev: input3, Type: 20, Code: 0, Value: 500
> warning: `sudo' uses deprecated v2 capabilities in a way that may be insecure.
>
> i've attached the config.
>
> at first sight it looks like a genuine bug in fs/sysfs/bin.c?
Yes, it is a real bug by the looks. bin.c takes bb->mutex under mmap_sem
when it is mmapped, and then does its copy_*_user under bb->mutex too.
Here is a basic fix for the sysfs lor.
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2008-09-12 11:24:11 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2009-07-08 11:17:34 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-31 15:23:24 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-31 15:23:24 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-31 15:23:24 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-31 15:23:24 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-09-27 22:29:37 +04:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:15 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2007-09-20 16:05:11 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2010-05-12 18:28:57 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-23 01:41:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:15 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2007-09-20 16:05:11 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-09-20 16:05:10 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:17 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:17 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:17 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:17 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-09-20 16:05:10 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:17 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2010-02-11 15:18:38 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 03:45:16 +09:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-28 01:56:42 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-04 11:57:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-12-18 15:34:20 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 04:27:22 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-14 04:27:22 +09:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009-12-18 15:34:20 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-03-30 11:31:26 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|