[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251222122628.38e9bc89@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2025 12:26:28 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: Jiayuan Chen <jiayuan.chen@...ux.dev>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
syzbot+9b35e9bc0951140d13e6@...kaller.appspotmail.com, "David S. Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, Jakub Kicinski
<kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman
<horms@...nel.org>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Clark Williams <clrkwllms@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] ipv6: fix a BUG in rt6_get_pcpu_route() under
PREEMPT_RT
On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 12:16:39 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 09:50:58 +0100
> Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > > Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=9b35e9bc0951140d13e6
> > > Fixes: 951f788a80ff ("ipv6: fix a BUG in rt6_get_pcpu_route()")
> >
> > I would rather find when PREEMPT_RT was added/enabled, there is no
> > point blaming such an old commit
> > which was correct at the time, and forcing pointless backports to old
> > linux kernels.
>
> Ack!
Fixes: d2d6422f8bd1 ("x86: Allow to enable PREEMPT_RT.")
That was the first commit to enable PREEMPT_RT on any architecture (just
happened to be x86).
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists