On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 06:54:06PM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote: > On 2021/2/22 18:16, Greg KH wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 03:03:28PM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote: > > > From: Thomas Gleixner<tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > commit ac31c7ff8624409ba3c4901df9237a616c187a5d upstream. > > This commit is already in the 4.9 tree. If the backport was incorrect, > > say that here, and describe what went wrong and why this commit fixes > > it. > > > > Also state what commit this fixes as well, otherwise this changelog just > > looks like it is being applied again to the tree, which doesn't make > > much sense. > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h > > . > > I wrote a cover for it. but forgot to adjust the title of the cover: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210222070328.102384-1-nixiaoming@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > I found a dead code in the queue/4.9 branch of the stable-rc repository. > > 2021-02-03: > commit c27f392040e2f6 ("futex: Provide distinct return value when > owner is exiting") > The function handle_exit_race does not exist. Therefore, the > change in handle_exit_race() is ignored in the patch round. > > 2021-02-22: > commit e55cb811e612 ("futex: Cure exit race") > Define the handle_exit_race() function, > but no branch in the function returns EBUSY. > As a result, dead code occurs in the attach_to_pi_owner(): > > int ret = handle_exit_race(uaddr, uval, p); > ... > if (ret == -EBUSY) > *exiting = p; /* dead code */ > > To fix the dead code, modify the commit e55cb811e612 ("futex: Cure exit > race"), > or install a patch to incorporate the changes in handle_exit_race(). > > I am unfamiliar with the processing of the stable-rc queue branch, > and I cannot find the patch mail of the current branch in > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/?q=%22futex%3A+Cure+exit+race%22 > Therefore, I re-integrated commit ac31c7ff8624 ("futex: Provide distinct > return value when owner is exiting"). > And wrote a cover (but forgot to adjust the title of the cover): > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210222070328.102384-1-nixiaoming@xxxxxxxxxx/ So this is a "fixup" patch, right? Please clearly label it as such in your patch description and resend this as what is here I can not apply at all. thanks, greg k-h
