On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 01:12:29PM +0000, KY Srinivasan wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 2:03 AM > > To: KY Srinivasan > > Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > olaf@xxxxxxxxx; apw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Drivers: hv: vmbus: Perform device register in the > > per-channel work element > > > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 10:02:24AM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 06:56:54PM -0700, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote: > > > > This patch is a continuation of the rescind handling cleanup work. > > > > We cannot block in the global message handling work context > > > > especially if we are blocking waiting for the host to wake us up. I > > > > would like to thank Dexuan Cui <decui@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> for observing > > this problem. > > > > > > > > The current Linux 4.0 RC3 tree is broken and this patch fixes the problem. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: K. Y. Srinivasan <kys@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/hv/channel_mgmt.c | 143 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- > > > > drivers/hv/connection.c | 6 ++- > > > > drivers/hv/hyperv_vmbus.h | 2 +- > > > > 3 files changed, 107 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-) > > > > > > This is a very big patch so late in the -rc cycle. Is there some > > > patch that got merged in 4.0-rc1 that I should be reverting instead to > > > fix things up? > > > > Make that, "this is a very large patch set", not just one patch. I can't take all > > of these this late, sorry. Please just tell me what to revert. > > Greg, > > Would it be possible to pick up two patches. I could prune this down to two. The two I want you to > pick up are (in the order of importance): > > [PATCH 1/6] Drivers: hv: vmbus: Perform device register in the per-channel work element > [PATCH 2/6] Drivers: hv: hv_balloon: keep locks balanced on add_memory() failure > > If you could pickup an additional patch that would be: > > [PATCH 6/6] Drivers: hv: vmbus: Fix a bug in rescind processing in vmbus_close_internal() > > The first one is the most important one and if you can only pickup one, the first one is the one I want you to pick up. You aren't answering my question, what happened that caused these to become an error and break the 4.0-rc tree? Shouldn't I just revert a recent change here? Or has things always been broken and no one has noticed it before? I need a lot more information here please. Oh, and also, please wrap your email lines :) > The third one fixes a memory leak issue that occurs only under > certain conditions. You need to describe those "certian conditions" better. > We may have to revert more patches than applying the two patches that > would fix the most important issues. I can easly revert everything recently applied, which is much safer than adding more patches on top of things. In fact, I prefer to do that, so what git commit ids should I revert? thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
