linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the scsi tree with the rcu tree

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20191029150826.38c26ef8@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Tue, 29 Oct 2019 15:08:26 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ryan Attard <ryanattard@...nattard.info>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the scsi tree with the rcu tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the scsi tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c

between commit:

  81db81f82993 ("drivers/scsi: Replace rcu_swap_protected() with rcu_replace()")

from the rcu tree and commit:

  d188b0675b21 ("scsi: core: Add sysfs attributes for VPD pages 0h and 89h")

from the scsi tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
index cc51f4756077,0fa2ed343c7f..000000000000
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
@@@ -466,12 -467,18 +467,18 @@@ static void scsi_device_dev_release_use
  	sdev->request_queue = NULL;
  
  	mutex_lock(&sdev->inquiry_mutex);
 -	rcu_swap_protected(sdev->vpd_pg0, vpd_pg0,
 -			   lockdep_is_held(&sdev->inquiry_mutex));
 -	rcu_swap_protected(sdev->vpd_pg80, vpd_pg80,
 -			   lockdep_is_held(&sdev->inquiry_mutex));
 -	rcu_swap_protected(sdev->vpd_pg83, vpd_pg83,
 -			   lockdep_is_held(&sdev->inquiry_mutex));
 -	rcu_swap_protected(sdev->vpd_pg89, vpd_pg89,
 -			   lockdep_is_held(&sdev->inquiry_mutex));
++	vpd_pg0 = rcu_replace_pointer(sdev->vpd_pg0, vpd_pg0,
++				      lockdep_is_held(&sdev->inquiry_mutex));
 +	vpd_pg80 = rcu_replace_pointer(sdev->vpd_pg80, vpd_pg80,
 +				       lockdep_is_held(&sdev->inquiry_mutex));
 +	vpd_pg83 = rcu_replace_pointer(sdev->vpd_pg83, vpd_pg83,
 +				       lockdep_is_held(&sdev->inquiry_mutex));
++	vpd_pg89 = rcu_replace_pointer(sdev->vpd_pg89, vpd_pg89,
++				       lockdep_is_held(&sdev->inquiry_mutex));
  	mutex_unlock(&sdev->inquiry_mutex);
  
+ 	if (vpd_pg0)
+ 		kfree_rcu(vpd_pg0, rcu);
  	if (vpd_pg83)
  		kfree_rcu(vpd_pg83, rcu);
  	if (vpd_pg80)

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped