On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 12:38:59PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 12:25:21PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 11:53:29AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.4.274 release.
> > > There are 215 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> > > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> > > let me know.
> > >
> > > Responses should be made by Sat, 13 Apr 2024 09:53:55 +0000.
> > > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > >
> > [ ... ]
> > >
> > > Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > KVM: Always flush async #PF workqueue when vCPU is being destroyed
> > >
> >
> > This backport is bad. In kvm_setup_async_pf(), it removes a call to
> > kvm_get_kvm(). However, it does not remove the call to kvm_put_kvm()
> > in its error handler. Also see upstream commit 7863e346e108 ("KVM:
> > async_pf: Cleanup kvm_setup_async_pf()") which explains that one of
> > the error paths in kvm_setup_async_pf() which is not supposed to be
> > observed can be observed after all.
> >
>
> Reverting the above commit from v5.4.y fixes the problem. Alternatively,
> applying commit 7863e346e108 on top of v5.4.274 fixes it as well.
>
> I added Phillip Pearson to Cc:; he did all the testing and can provide
> additional information if needed.
So which is recommended, revert or add the other commit?
thanks,
greg k-h
