Hou Tao <houtao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Hi, > > On 1/17/2025 8:35 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: >> Hou Tao <houtao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> From: Hou Tao <houtao1@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> The freeing of special fields in map value may acquire a spin-lock >>> (e.g., the freeing of bpf_timer), however, the lookup_and_delete_elem >>> procedure has already held a raw-spin-lock, which violates the lockdep >>> rule. >> This implies that we're fixing a locking violation here? Does this need >> a Fixes tag? >> >> -Toke > > Ah, the fix tag is a bit hard. The lockdep violation in the patch is > also related with PREEMPT_RT, however, the lookup_and_delete_elem is > introduced in v5.14. Also considering that patch #4 will also fix the > lockdep violation in the case, I prefer to not add a fix tag in the > patch. Instead I will update the commit message for the patch to state > that it will reduce the lock scope of bucket lock. What do you think ? Sure; and maybe put the same explanation for why there's no Fixes tag into the commit message as well? :) -Toke
