> -----Original Message----- > From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 6:29 AM > To: KY Srinivasan > Cc: apw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; olaf@xxxxxxxxx; > linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Drivers: hv: vmbus: Perform device register in the > per-channel work element > > 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? commit 2dd37cb81580dce6dfb8c5a7d5c37b904a188ae7 introduced the bug (committed on Feb 28th). This patch cleaned up the rescind handling code. The patches I sent a few days later: Drivers: hv: vmbus: Perform device register in the per-channel work element fixed it. Drivers: hv: vmbus: Fix a bug in rescind processing in vmbus_close_internal() Fixed the bugs. > > 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. When a channel that has been rescinded is closed, we will leak memory. This bug was also introduced by: commit 2dd37cb81580dce6dfb8c5a7d5c37b904a188ae7 > > > 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? If you revert commit 2dd37cb81580dce6dfb8c5a7d5c37b904a188ae7 we should be fine in that we will have all the issues we have had for a while with regards to rescind handling. Regards, K. Y _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
