[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e1eb47ea-7327-7565-3a8f-3d9cf4ee904c@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 12:24:24 -0500
From: John Donnelly <John.p.donnelly@...cle.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux@...ck-us.net, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org,
lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, pavel@...x.de, jonathanh@...dia.com,
f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com,
slade@...dewatkins.com, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.15 000/124] 5.15.36-rc1 review
On 4/26/22 12:52 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 12:37:21PM -0500, john.p.donnelly@...cle.com wrote:
>> 76723ed1fb89 2021-12-01 | locking/rwsem: Make handoff bit handling more
>> consistent
>>
>> In Linux 5.15.y.
>
> That commit is in 5.15.6, released December 1, 2021. And this just now
> shows up? How is this related to 5.15.36-rc1?
Hi,
This was briefly discussed in :
Re: [PATCH v5] locking/rwsem: Make handoff bit handling more consistent
Additional testing shows the rwsem hang still exists. It takes a 24hr
fio soak test to show up.
It likely still exists in Linux 5.18.y too. We will be testing that in
the future as time permits.
>
> Please start a new thread with the authors/reviewers of that commit and
> we will be glad to discuss it.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Will do.
Thx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists