On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 03:44:48PM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > I noticed 4.19.35 got a backport of mainline 4abb951b, but it appears to > be a duplicate backport that landed in the wrong function. We can see > this in the stable-queue repo: > > stable-queue$ find . -name '*acpica-aml-interpreter-add-region-addr*' |grep 4.19 > ./releases/4.19.6/acpica-aml-interpreter-add-region-addresses-in-global-list-during-initialization.patch > ./releases/4.19.3/revert-acpica-aml-interpreter-add-region-addresses-in.patch > ./releases/4.19.35/acpica-aml-interpreter-add-region-addresses-in-global-list-during-initialization.patch > ./releases/4.19.2/acpica-aml-interpreter-add-region-addresses-in-global-list-during-initialization.patch > > So it was added to 4.19.2, reverted in .3, re-added in .6, and then > finally patched into a similar looking but wrong function in .35 > > If we diff the .6 and .35 versions, we see the function difference: > > -@@ -417,6 +417,10 @@ acpi_ds_eval_region_operands(struct acpi > +@@ -523,6 +523,10 @@ acpi_ds_eval_table_region_operands(struc > > I don't know what the history is/was around the 2/3/6 churn, but the > re-addition in 4.19.35 to a different function sure looks wrong. > > The commit adds a call "status = acpi_ut_add_address_range(..." and if > we check mainline, there is only one in that file, but in 4.19.35+ there > now are two calls - since the two functions had similar context and > comments, it isn't hard to see how patch could/would apply it a 2nd time > in the wrong place. > > I didn't check if any of the other currently maintained linux-stable > versions also had this possible issue. > Ugh, Rafael, did I mess this up again? Can you check to see if I need to fix this somehow? thanks, greg k-h
