Re: [PATCH 4.4 0/3] Backport patch series to update Futex from 4.9

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 2021/3/9 18:41, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 11:06:02AM +0800, Zheng Yejian wrote:
Lee sent a patchset to update Futex for 4.9, see https://www.spinics.net/lists/stable/msg443081.html,
Then Xiaoming sent a follow-up patch for it, see https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210225093120.GD641347@dell/.

These patchsets may also resolve following issues in 4.4.260 which have been reported in 4.9,
see https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/?h=linux-4.4.y&id=319f66f08de1083c1fe271261665c209009dd65a
       > /*
       >  * The task is on the way out. When the futex state is
       >  * FUTEX_STATE_DEAD, we know that the task has finished
       >  * the cleanup:
       >  */
       > int ret = (p->futex_state = FUTEX_STATE_DEAD) ? -ESRCH : -EAGAIN;

     Here may be:
       int ret = (p->futex_state == FUTEX_STATE_DEAD) ? -ESRCH : -EAGAIN;

       > raw_spin_unlock_irq(&p->pi_lock);
       > /*
       >  * If the owner task is between FUTEX_STATE_EXITING and
       >  * FUTEX_STATE_DEAD then store the task pointer and keep
       >  * the reference on the task struct. The calling code will
       >  * drop all locks, wait for the task to reach
       >  * FUTEX_STATE_DEAD and then drop the refcount. This is
       >  * required to prevent a live lock when the current task
       >  * preempted the exiting task between the two states.
       >  */
       > if (ret == -EBUSY)

     And here, the variable "ret" may only be "-ESRCH" or "-EAGAIN", but not "-EBUSY".

       > 	*exiting = p;
       > else
       > 	put_task_struct(p);

Since 074e7d515783 ("futex: Ensure the correct return value from futex_lock_pi()") has
been merged in 4.4.260, I send the remain 3 patches.

There already are 2 futex patches in the 4.4.y stable queue, do those
not resolve these issues for you?

I think that 2 futex patches in 4.4 stable queue are fixing other issues:
    futex-fix-irq-self-deadlock-and-satisfy-assertion.patch
    futex-fix-spin_lock-spin_unlock_irq-imbalance.patch
But I am not very sure if there are any lock conflicts between that 2 patches and this 3 patches.


If not, please resend this series with the needed git commit ids added to
them.

I have add that information and sent a "v2" patchset.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux