linux-kernel - Re: 4.14 backport request for dbdda842fe96f: "printk: Add console owner and waiter logic to load balance console writes"

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]

Date:   Wed, 12 Dec 2018 22:59:39 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Wang <wonderfly@...gle.com>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        byungchul.park@....com, dave.hansen@...el.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
        jack@...e.cz, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, mhocko@...nel.org, pavel@....cz,
        penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, tj@...nel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, vbabka@...e.cz,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Peter Feiner <pfeiner@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: 4.14 backport request for dbdda842fe96f: "printk: Add console
 owner and waiter logic to load balance console writes"

On (12/12/18 14:36), Petr Mladek wrote:
> > OK, really didn't know that! I wasn't Cc-ed on that AUTOSEL email,
> > and I wasn't Cc-ed on this whole discussion and found it purely
> > accidentally while browsing linux-mm list.
> 
> I am sorry that I did not CC you. There were so many people in CC.
> I expected that all people mentioned in the related commit message
> were included by default.

No worries! I'm not blaming anyone.

> > So if you are willing to backport this set to -stable, then I wouldn't
> > mind, probably would be more correct if we don't advertise this as a
> > "panic() deadlock fix"
> 
> This should not be a problem. I guess that stable does not modify
> the original commit messages unless there is a change.

Agreed.

> > In the meantime, I can add my Acked-by to this backport if it helps.
> 
> I am fine with back-porting the patches now. They have got much more
> testing in the meantime and nobody reported any regression. They
> seems to help in more situations than we expected. Finally, there is
> someone requesting the backport who spent non-trivial time
> on tracking the problem and testing.

Great!


Sasha, here is
	Acked-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
from me.

And expect another backport request in 1 or 2 weeks - the patch
which eliminates the existing "panic CPU != uart_port lock owner CPU"
limitation.

	-ss