linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] trace/osnoise: Fix missed cpus_read_unlock() in start_per_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: <BL1PR11MB5478CF84562E63476BB1472AFFD49@BL1PR11MB5478.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Sep 2021 02:34:46 +0000
From:   "Zhang, Qiang" <Qiang.Zhang@...driver.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC:     "bristot@...hat.com" <bristot@...hat.com>,
        "bristot@...nel.org" <bristot@...nel.org>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] trace/osnoise: Fix missed cpus_read_unlock() in
 start_per_cpu_kthreads()



________________________________________
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Sent: Wednesday, 8 September 2021 09:17
To: Zhang, Qiang
Cc: bristot@...hat.com; bristot@...nel.org; mingo@...hat.com; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] trace/osnoise: Fix missed cpus_read_unlock() in start_per_cpu_kthreads()

[Please note: This e-mail is from an EXTERNAL e-mail address]

On Tue, 31 Aug 2021 10:29:19 +0800
qiang.zhang@...driver.com wrote:

> From: "Qiang.Zhang" <qiang.zhang@...driver.com>
>
> When start_kthread() return error, the cpus_read_unlock() need
> to be called.
>
> Fixes: c8895e271f79 ("trace/osnoise: Support hotplug operations")
> Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # v5.14+

>FYI, no need to add the "# v5.14+", as it also breaks my scripts. The
>"Fixes:" tag is now used to know what stable releases it needs to be
>applied to (if any).
>
Thanks Steve
I will resend v3.
 

>Daniel, that goes for you too, as you suggested it ;-)
>
>-- Steve