linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] timers/nohz updates for v3.18

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20141009125721.GA25790@lerouge>
Date:	Thu, 9 Oct 2014 14:57:25 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] timers/nohz updates for v3.18

On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 06:34:26AM -0400, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Hmm..
> 
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Please pull the latest timers-nohz-for-linus git tree from:
> >
> >    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git timers-nohz-for-linus
> >
> >    # HEAD: 9b01f5bf3999a3db5b1bbd9fdfd80d8d304e94ee nohz: nohz full depends on irq work self IPI support
> >
> > Main changes:
> >
> >  - Fix the deadlock reported by Dave Jones et al
> >  - Clean up and fix nohz_full interaction with arch abilities
> >  - nohz init code consolidation/cleanup
> 
> Ok, pulled. But none of these are marked for stable, yet the deadlock
> people are seeing is in 3.17. Is there a separate line of minimal
> fixes just for that? Or was the lack of stable tags just an oversight?

It was first intended because the patchset is quite invasive and nohz full has
no known users, or perhaps there is one... So I thought that backporting
could be more dangerous than anything.

Now thinking more about it I could isolate the following patches for
stable:

      irq_work: Introduce arch_irq_work_has_interrupt()
      irq_work: Force raised irq work to run on irq work interrupt
      x86: Tell irq work about self IPI support
      arm: Tell irq work about self IPI support

Sending these to stable@...r.kernel.org would catch up, right? I
can still do that.

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