> -----Original Message----- > From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 1:22 PM > 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 02:16:23PM +0000, KY Srinivasan wrote: > > > > > > > -----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. > > Ok, commit 2dd37cb81580dce6dfb8c5a7d5c37b904a188ae7 is on my char- > misc-next branch, and has nothing to do with 4.0-final. So why do you think > anything needs to be done for 4.0? > > Please take a look at my tree, at Linus's tree, and figure out exactly what > needs to be fixed where, and resend me patches that explicitly says which > branch for me to apply them to (char-linus for patches that need to go for > 4.0-final, char-next for patches that need to go into > 4.1-rc1.) You are right, the offending commit is NOT in 4.0-rc4 tree that I looked at earlier this afternoon. > > I'm again dropping all of your pending patches in my to-apply queue, as it's all > just too confusing here and no one seems to know what is going on (myself > included.) Sorry about the confusion. My mistake; last week I looked at a test tree that had the offending commit and I was told that the tree was the 4.0-rc3 tree. I will resend the patches that need to go into 4.1-rc1. Regards, K. Y _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
