[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cughucmlrkwe3unwwmtx3yrqyrqwsedrbh2ck5feqs6cr36j3z@fhrnw6nfnyte>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2025 19:23:43 +0200
From: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
To: JP Kobryn <inwardvessel@...il.com>
Cc: tj@...nel.org, shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, yosryahmed@...gle.com,
hannes@...xchg.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5 cgroup/for-6.16-fixes] harden css_create() for safe
placement of call to css_rstat_init()
Hi.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 06:40:25PM -0700, JP Kobryn <inwardvessel@...il.com> wrote:
...
Thanks for the instructive summary!
> If any of the three goto jumps are taken, async cleanup will begin and
> css_rstat_exit() will be invoked. But since css_rstat_init() would not have
> succeeded, the warning will eventually be reached.
First thought is why not simply add a flag that'd guide whether
css_rstat_exit() has work to do.
This is meant as a fix, so it should have some metadata, I'd consider this one:
Fixes: 5da3bfa029d68 ("cgroup: use separate rstat trees for each subsystem")
(that's when css_rstat_init was moved to css_create)
and likely this
Reported-by: syzbot+8d052e8b99e40bc625ed@...kaller.appspotmail.com
(Sorry for being such a bureaucrat.)
It's most appropriate in your 4/5 but do you think it'd be possible to
reshuffle the series to put the fix in front (to ease it for stable
kernels) and refactorings after?
Regards,
Michal
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists