linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] dmaengine: dmatest: Fix dmatest waiting less when interrupted

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: <87o6xdzz5w.fsf@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2025 20:44:59 -0700
From: Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>
To: Nathan Lynch <nathan.lynch@....com>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
 dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: dave.jiang@...el.com, kristen.c.accardi@...el.com, kernel test robot
 <oliver.sang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] dmaengine: dmatest: Fix dmatest waiting less when
 interrupted

Nathan Lynch <nathan.lynch@....com> writes:

> Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com> writes:
>> Nathan Lynch <nathan.lynch@....com> writes:
>>
>>> Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com> writes:
>>>> Nathan Lynch <nathan.lynch@....com> writes:
>>>>> dmatest_callback() employs wake_up_all(), which means this change
>>>>> introduces no beneficial difference in the wakeup behavior. The dmatest
>>>>> thread gets woken on receipt of the completion interrupt either way.
>>>>>
>>>>> And to reiterate, the change regresses the combination of dmatest and
>>>>> the task freezer, which is a use case people have cared about,
>>>>> apparently.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If this change in behavior causes a regression for others, glad to send
>>>> a revert and find another solution.
>>>
>>> Thanks - yes it should be reverted or dropped IMO.
>>
>> Here's what I am thinking, I'll work on this a few days and see if I can
>> find an alternative solution and send the revert together with the fix.
>> If I can't find another solution in a few days, I'll propose the revert
>> anyway.
>
> Just checking on this - I see this regression is in Linus's master
> branch now.

I have a series with the revert, a (hopefully better) fix for this
issue, and a couple of others that I found along the way, that I should
be able to propose soon.


Cheers,
-- 
Vinicius