[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2023112455-anytime-unmapped-ed7d@gregkh>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:11:35 +0000
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lgoncalv@...hat.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
stable-rt <stable-rt@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Carsten Emde <C.Emde@...dl.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...e.com>,
Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>,
Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
Mark Gross <markgross@...nel.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>,
Jeff Brady <jeffreyjbrady@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] 5.10.201-rt98
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 10:36:23AM -0300, Luis Claudio R. Goncalves wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 10:01:25PM -0300, Luis Claudio R. Goncalves wrote:
> > Hello RT-list!
> >
> > I'm pleased to announce the 5.10.201-rt98 stable release.
> >
> > This release is just an update to the new stable 5.10.201
> > version and no RT changes have been made.
> >
> > You can get this release via the git tree at:
> >
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rt/linux-stable-rt.git
> >
> > branch: v5.10-rt
> > Head SHA1: 3a93f0a0d49dd0db4c6876ca9a7369350e64320e
>
> Greg KH,
>
> While testing v5.10.201-rt98 I stumbled over this warning:
>
> [ 1000.312397] run blktests nvme/005 at 2023-11-21 21:46:30
> ...
> [ 1000.500478] workqueue: WQ_MEM_RECLAIM nvmet_tcp_wq:nvmet_tcp_io_work [nvmet_tcp] is flushing !WQ_MEM_RECLAIM events:0x0
> [ 1000.500490] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 6 at kernel/workqueue.c:2620 check_flush_dependency+0x11f/0x140
>
> That seems to be fixed by:
>
> 533d2e8b4d5e4 nvmet-tcp: fix lockdep complaint on nvmet_tcp_wq flush during queue teardown
> (and depending on what else is backported)
> ddd2b8de9f85b nvmet: fix workqueue MEM_RECLAIM flushing dependency
>
> Is this something that can be added to your v5.10 queue or should I carry
> this fix on v5.10-rt in the meantime?
That's odd, as this commit is already in the 5.10.138 release, so how
can we apply it again?
confused,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists