Message-ID: <CAOf5uwmVrH6nwkp1fb+WAS0XR=hm4XoQfHZK=OyGLFajMHtnRw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 17 Dec 2022 10:01:24 +0100
From:   Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi <michael@...rulasolutions.com>
To:     Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...merspace.com>
Cc:     Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
        Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        "shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>,
        "patches@...nelci.org" <patches@...nelci.org>,
        "lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org" <lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org>,
        "pavel@...x.de" <pavel@...x.de>,
        "jonathanh@...dia.com" <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        "f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com" <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
        "slade@...dewatkins.com" <slade@...dewatkins.com>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 000/338] 4.19.238-rc1 review

Hi

On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 10:25 PM Trond Myklebust
<trondmy@...merspace.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 16, 2022, at 13:31, Michael Trimarchi <michael@...rulasolutions.com> wrote:
> >
> > [You don't often get email from michael@...rulasolutions.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
> >
> > Hi Neil
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 12:29:55PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> >> On Thu, 21 Apr 2022, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 at 14:09, Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 at 18:45, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> >>>> <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.19.238 release.
> >>>>> There are 338 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> >>>>> to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> >>>>> let me know.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Responses should be made by Sat, 16 Apr 2022 11:07:54 +0000.
> >>>>> Anything received after that time might be too late.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
> >>>>>        https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.19.238-rc1.gz
> >>>>> or in the git tree and branch at:
> >>>>>        git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.19.y
> >>>>> and the diffstat can be found below.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thanks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> greg k-h
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Following kernel warning noticed on arm64 Juno-r2 while booting
> >>>> stable-rc 4.19.238. Here is the full test log link [1].
> >>>>
> >>>> [    0.000000] Booting Linux on physical CPU 0x0000000100 [0x410fd033]
> >>>> [    0.000000] Linux version 4.19.238 (tuxmake@...make) (gcc version
> >>>> 11.2.0 (Debian 11.2.0-18)) #1 SMP PREEMPT @1650206156
> >>>> [    0.000000] Machine model: ARM Juno development board (r2)
> >>>> <trim>
> >>>> [   18.499895] ================================
> >>>> [   18.504172] WARNING: inconsistent lock state
> >>>> [   18.508451] 4.19.238 #1 Not tainted
> >>>> [   18.511944] --------------------------------
> >>>> [   18.516222] inconsistent {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} -> {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} usage.
> >>>> [   18.522242] kworker/u12:3/60 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
> >>>> [   18.527826] (____ptrval____)
> >>>> (&(&xprt->transport_lock)->rlock){+.?.}, at: xprt_destroy+0x70/0xe0
> >>>> [   18.536648] {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} state was registered at:
> >>>> [   18.541543]   lock_acquire+0xc8/0x23c
> >>
> >> Prior to Linux 5.3, ->transport_lock needs spin_lock_bh() and
> >> spin_unlock_bh().
> >>
> >
> > We get the same deadlock or similar one and we think that
> > can be connected to this thread on 4.19.243. For us is a bit
> > difficult to hit but we are going to apply this change
> >
> > net: sunrpc: Fix deadlock in xprt_destroy
> >
> > Prior to Linux 5.3, ->transport_lock needs spin_lock_bh() and
> > spin_unlock_bh().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Trimarchi <michael@...rulasolutions.com>
> > ---
> > net/sunrpc/xprt.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/sunrpc/xprt.c b/net/sunrpc/xprt.c
> > index d05fa7c36d00..b1abf4848bbc 100644
> > --- a/net/sunrpc/xprt.c
> > +++ b/net/sunrpc/xprt.c
> > @@ -1550,9 +1550,9 @@ static void xprt_destroy(struct rpc_xprt *xprt)
> >         * is cleared.  We use ->transport_lock to ensure the mod_timer()
> >         * can only run *before* del_time_sync(), never after.
> >         */
> > -       spin_lock(&xprt->transport_lock);
> > +       spin_lock_bh(&xprt->transport_lock);
> >        del_timer_sync(&xprt->timer);
> > -       spin_unlock(&xprt->transport_lock);
> > +       spin_unlock_bh(&xprt->transport_lock);
> >
> >        /*
> >         * Destroy sockets etc from the system workqueue so they can
> > —
>
> Agreed. When backporting to kernels that are older than 5.3.x, the transport lock needs to be taken using the bh-safe spin lock variants.
>
> Reviewed-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com <mailto:trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>>
>

Seems already applied, but for some reason I miss it. I will re-align
to stable again

Michael

> _________________________________
> Trond Myklebust
> Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
> trond.myklebust@...merspace.com
>


-- 
Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi
Co-Founder & Chief Executive Officer
M. +39 347 913 2170
michael@...rulasolutions.com
__________________________________

Amarula Solutions BV
Joop Geesinkweg 125, 1114 AB, Amsterdam, NL
T. +31 (0)85 111 9172
info@...rulasolutions.com
www.amarulasolutions.com

Powered by blists - more mailing lists