[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fd88506a-bde9-0e63-3473-6b15ed8dbaa2@de.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 15:26:43 +0200
From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, ast@...nel.org,
axboe@...nel.dk, bfields@...ldses.org,
bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org, chainsaw@...too.org,
christian.brauner@...ntu.com, chuck.lever@...cle.com,
davem@...emloft.net, dhowells@...hat.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com,
jmorris@...ei.org, josh@...htriplett.org, keescook@...omium.org,
keyrings@...r.kernel.org, kuba@...nel.org,
lars.ellenberg@...bit.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com,
philipp.reisner@...bit.com, ravenexp@...il.com,
roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, serge@...lyn.com, slyfox@...too.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, markward@...ux.ibm.com,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used
seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected)
On 24.06.20 20:37, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 24.06.20 20:32, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> [...]>
>> So the translations look correct. But your change is actually a sematic change
>> if(ret) will only trigger if there is an error
>> if (KWIFEXITED(ret)) will always trigger when the process ends. So we will always overwrite -ECHILD
>> and we did not do it before.
>>
>
> So the right fix is
>
> diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
> index f81e8698e36e..a3a3196e84d1 100644
> --- a/kernel/umh.c
> +++ b/kernel/umh.c
> @@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ static void call_usermodehelper_exec_sync(struct subprocess_info *sub_info)
> * the real error code is already in sub_info->retval or
> * sub_info->retval is 0 anyway, so don't mess with it then.
> */
> - if (KWIFEXITED(ret))
> + if (KWEXITSTATUS(ret))
> sub_info->retval = KWEXITSTATUS(ret);
> }
Ping. Shall I send this as a proper patch or are we merging this fixup in Andrews patch queue?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists