On Tue, 28 May 2013 04:49:53 +0100
Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 3.2.46-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>
> ------------------
>
> From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> commit 506026c3ec270e18402f0c9d33fee37482c23861 upstream.
>
> rpc_make_runnable is not generally called with the queue lock held, unless
> it's waking up a task that has been sitting on a waitqueue. This is safe
> when the task has not entered the FSM yet, but the comments don't really
> spell this out.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> net/sunrpc/sched.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/net/sunrpc/sched.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/sched.c
> @@ -296,8 +296,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__rpc_wait_for_complet
> /*
> * Make an RPC task runnable.
> *
> - * Note: If the task is ASYNC, this must be called with
> - * the spinlock held to protect the wait queue operation.
> + * Note: If the task is ASYNC, and is being made runnable after sitting on an
> + * rpc_wait_queue, this must be called with the queue spinlock held to protect
> + * the wait queue operation.
> */
> static void rpc_make_runnable(struct rpc_task *task)
> {
>
Just a comment patch, so this is harmless and I have no objection but
why pull it into stable? I had always thought stable-kernel-rules.txt
discouraged taking patches that don't fix real bugs...
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html