Ian McDonald | 43019a5 | 2006-03-22 00:37:42 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 1 | Table of contents |
| 2 | ================= |
| 3 | |
| 4 | Last updated: 20 December 2005 |
| 5 | |
| 6 | Contents |
| 7 | ======== |
| 8 | |
| 9 | - Introduction |
| 10 | - Devices not appearing |
| 11 | - Finding patch that caused a bug |
| 12 | -- Finding using git-bisect |
| 13 | -- Finding it the old way |
| 14 | - Fixing the bug |
| 15 | |
| 16 | Introduction |
| 17 | ============ |
| 18 | |
| 19 | Always try the latest kernel from kernel.org and build from source. If you are |
| 20 | not confident in doing that please report the bug to your distribution vendor |
| 21 | instead of to a kernel developer. |
| 22 | |
| 23 | Finding bugs is not always easy. Have a go though. If you can't find it don't |
| 24 | give up. Report as much as you have found to the relevant maintainer. See |
| 25 | MAINTAINERS for who that is for the subsystem you have worked on. |
| 26 | |
| 27 | Before you submit a bug report read REPORTING-BUGS. |
| 28 | |
| 29 | Devices not appearing |
| 30 | ===================== |
| 31 | |
| 32 | Often this is caused by udev. Check that first before blaming it on the |
| 33 | kernel. |
| 34 | |
| 35 | Finding patch that caused a bug |
| 36 | =============================== |
| 37 | |
| 38 | |
| 39 | |
| 40 | Finding using git-bisect |
| 41 | ------------------------ |
| 42 | |
| 43 | Using the provided tools with git makes finding bugs easy provided the bug is |
| 44 | reproducible. |
| 45 | |
| 46 | Steps to do it: |
| 47 | - start using git for the kernel source |
| 48 | - read the man page for git-bisect |
| 49 | - have fun |
| 50 | |
| 51 | Finding it the old way |
| 52 | ---------------------- |
| 53 | |
Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 54 | [Sat Mar 2 10:32:33 PST 1996 KERNEL_BUG-HOWTO lm@sgi.com (Larry McVoy)] |
| 55 | |
| 56 | This is how to track down a bug if you know nothing about kernel hacking. |
| 57 | It's a brute force approach but it works pretty well. |
| 58 | |
| 59 | You need: |
| 60 | |
| 61 | . A reproducible bug - it has to happen predictably (sorry) |
| 62 | . All the kernel tar files from a revision that worked to the |
| 63 | revision that doesn't |
| 64 | |
| 65 | You will then do: |
| 66 | |
| 67 | . Rebuild a revision that you believe works, install, and verify that. |
| 68 | . Do a binary search over the kernels to figure out which one |
| 69 | introduced the bug. I.e., suppose 1.3.28 didn't have the bug, but |
| 70 | you know that 1.3.69 does. Pick a kernel in the middle and build |
| 71 | that, like 1.3.50. Build & test; if it works, pick the mid point |
| 72 | between .50 and .69, else the mid point between .28 and .50. |
| 73 | . You'll narrow it down to the kernel that introduced the bug. You |
| 74 | can probably do better than this but it gets tricky. |
| 75 | |
| 76 | . Narrow it down to a subdirectory |
| 77 | |
| 78 | - Copy kernel that works into "test". Let's say that 3.62 works, |
| 79 | but 3.63 doesn't. So you diff -r those two kernels and come |
| 80 | up with a list of directories that changed. For each of those |
| 81 | directories: |
| 82 | |
| 83 | Copy the non-working directory next to the working directory |
| 84 | as "dir.63". |
| 85 | One directory at time, try moving the working directory to |
| 86 | "dir.62" and mv dir.63 dir"time, try |
| 87 | |
| 88 | mv dir dir.62 |
| 89 | mv dir.63 dir |
| 90 | find dir -name '*.[oa]' -print | xargs rm -f |
| 91 | |
| 92 | And then rebuild and retest. Assuming that all related |
| 93 | changes were contained in the sub directory, this should |
| 94 | isolate the change to a directory. |
| 95 | |
| 96 | Problems: changes in header files may have occurred; I've |
| 97 | found in my case that they were self explanatory - you may |
| 98 | or may not want to give up when that happens. |
| 99 | |
| 100 | . Narrow it down to a file |
| 101 | |
| 102 | - You can apply the same technique to each file in the directory, |
| 103 | hoping that the changes in that file are self contained. |
| 104 | |
| 105 | . Narrow it down to a routine |
| 106 | |
| 107 | - You can take the old file and the new file and manually create |
| 108 | a merged file that has |
| 109 | |
| 110 | #ifdef VER62 |
| 111 | routine() |
| 112 | { |
| 113 | ... |
| 114 | } |
| 115 | #else |
| 116 | routine() |
| 117 | { |
| 118 | ... |
| 119 | } |
| 120 | #endif |
| 121 | |
| 122 | And then walk through that file, one routine at a time and |
| 123 | prefix it with |
| 124 | |
| 125 | #define VER62 |
| 126 | /* both routines here */ |
| 127 | #undef VER62 |
| 128 | |
| 129 | Then recompile, retest, move the ifdefs until you find the one |
| 130 | that makes the difference. |
| 131 | |
| 132 | Finally, you take all the info that you have, kernel revisions, bug |
| 133 | description, the extent to which you have narrowed it down, and pass |
| 134 | that off to whomever you believe is the maintainer of that section. |
| 135 | A post to linux.dev.kernel isn't such a bad idea if you've done some |
| 136 | work to narrow it down. |
| 137 | |
| 138 | If you get it down to a routine, you'll probably get a fix in 24 hours. |
| 139 | |
| 140 | My apologies to Linus and the other kernel hackers for describing this |
| 141 | brute force approach, it's hardly what a kernel hacker would do. However, |
| 142 | it does work and it lets non-hackers help fix bugs. And it is cool |
| 143 | because Linux snapshots will let you do this - something that you can't |
| 144 | do with vendor supplied releases. |
| 145 | |
Ian McDonald | 43019a5 | 2006-03-22 00:37:42 +0100 | [diff] [blame] | 146 | Fixing the bug |
| 147 | ============== |
| 148 | |
| 149 | Nobody is going to tell you how to fix bugs. Seriously. You need to work it |
| 150 | out. But below are some hints on how to use the tools. |
| 151 | |
| 152 | To debug a kernel, use objdump and look for the hex offset from the crash |
| 153 | output to find the valid line of code/assembler. Without debug symbols, you |
| 154 | will see the assembler code for the routine shown, but if your kernel has |
| 155 | debug symbols the C code will also be available. (Debug symbols can be enabled |
| 156 | in the kernel hacking menu of the menu configuration.) For example: |
| 157 | |
| 158 | objdump -r -S -l --disassemble net/dccp/ipv4.o |
| 159 | |
| 160 | NB.: you need to be at the top level of the kernel tree for this to pick up |
| 161 | your C files. |
| 162 | |
| 163 | If you don't have access to the code you can also debug on some crash dumps |
| 164 | e.g. crash dump output as shown by Dave Miller. |
| 165 | |
| 166 | > EIP is at ip_queue_xmit+0x14/0x4c0 |
| 167 | > ... |
| 168 | > Code: 44 24 04 e8 6f 05 00 00 e9 e8 fe ff ff 8d 76 00 8d bc 27 00 00 |
| 169 | > 00 00 55 57 56 53 81 ec bc 00 00 00 8b ac 24 d0 00 00 00 8b 5d 08 |
| 170 | > <8b> 83 3c 01 00 00 89 44 24 14 8b 45 28 85 c0 89 44 24 18 0f 85 |
| 171 | > |
| 172 | > Put the bytes into a "foo.s" file like this: |
| 173 | > |
| 174 | > .text |
| 175 | > .globl foo |
| 176 | > foo: |
| 177 | > .byte .... /* bytes from Code: part of OOPS dump */ |
| 178 | > |
| 179 | > Compile it with "gcc -c -o foo.o foo.s" then look at the output of |
| 180 | > "objdump --disassemble foo.o". |
| 181 | > |
| 182 | > Output: |
| 183 | > |
| 184 | > ip_queue_xmit: |
| 185 | > push %ebp |
| 186 | > push %edi |
| 187 | > push %esi |
| 188 | > push %ebx |
| 189 | > sub $0xbc, %esp |
| 190 | > mov 0xd0(%esp), %ebp ! %ebp = arg0 (skb) |
| 191 | > mov 0x8(%ebp), %ebx ! %ebx = skb->sk |
| 192 | > mov 0x13c(%ebx), %eax ! %eax = inet_sk(sk)->opt |
| 193 | |
| 194 | Another very useful option of the Kernel Hacking section in menuconfig is |
| 195 | Debug memory allocations. This will help you see whether data has been |
| 196 | initialised and not set before use etc. To see the values that get assigned |
| 197 | with this look at mm/slab.c and search for POISON_INUSE. When using this an |
| 198 | Oops will often show the poisoned data instead of zero which is the default. |
| 199 | |
| 200 | Once you have worked out a fix please submit it upstream. After all open |
| 201 | source is about sharing what you do and don't you want to be recognised for |
| 202 | your genius? |
| 203 | |
| 204 | Please do read Documentation/SubmittingPatches though to help your code get |
| 205 | accepted. |