linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] tracing/tlb/x85: Fix splat of calling RCU trace code on offline CPU

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: <CA+icZUVszLV6F6tq+yrtPycp2h5PpyG==wN1cbQsK72ePiRLBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 6 Feb 2015 22:21:58 +0100
From:	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] tracing/tlb/x85: Fix splat of calling RCU trace code
 on offline CPU

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 10:18 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Feb 2015 22:07:56 +0100
> Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> Your patchset fixes the issue for me (look at the attached files for
>> more detailed information).
>
> So I can add your Tested-by tag?
>

Yes.

>>
>> I tested the "To Be Loved" (TBL VS. TLB flushes) edition against
>> Linux-next (next-20150204) where I had originally seen and reported
>> the call-trace.
>>
>> Before I forget... The Fixes-tag misses pointing to Dave Hansen's...
>>
>> commit d17d8f9dedb9dd76fd540a5c497101529d9eb25a
>> "x86/mm: Add tracepoints for TLB flushes"
>
> Sure, I can add that, and even Cc stable for 3.17+.
>

Excellent!

>>
>> My POV is that both patches somehow belong together.
>> If you decide to push them through two different trees, please add a
>> note/reference to each other.
>
> The second patch should reference the first one.
>
> But the first patch is a much broader change and more generic which
> could affect many other locations as well. It is specific to
> tracepoints, where the tlb one is specific to a single instance. As the
> first patch affects all tracepoints, I want it in my tree.
>

Important for me is that the reference is embedded.

- Sedat -
--
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/