On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 10:14:18PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024, Sasha Levin wrote:[ Sasha's backport helper bot ] Hi, The upstream commit SHA1 provided is correct: d1aa0c04294e29883d65eac6c2f72fe95cc7c049 WARNING: Author mismatch between patch and upstream commit: Backport author: Hugh Dickins <hughd@xxxxxxxxxx> Commit author: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Commit in newer trees: |-----------------|----------------------------------------------| | 6.11.y | Present (different SHA1: 285505dc512d) | | 6.6.y | Present (different SHA1: 552c02da3b0f) | | 6.1.y | Not found | | 5.15.y | Not found | |-----------------|----------------------------------------------| Note: The patch differs from the upstream commit: --- --- - 2024-11-18 22:45:37.221809852 -0500 +++ /tmp/tmp.gWYpEchJE1 2024-11-18 22:45:37.214517918 -0500 @@ -1,3 +1,12 @@ +For 5.15 please use this replacement patch: + +>From 975b740a6d720fdf478e9238b65fa96e9b5d631a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> +Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 16:57:24 -0800 +Subject: [PATCH] mm: revert "mm: shmem: fix data-race in shmem_getattr()" + +commit d1aa0c04294e29883d65eac6c2f72fe95cc7c049 upstream. + Revert d949d1d14fa2 ("mm: shmem: fix data-race in shmem_getattr()") as suggested by Chuck [1]. It is causing deadlocks when accessing tmpfs over NFS. @@ -13,21 +22,25 @@ Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> +Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@xxxxxxxxxx> --- mm/shmem.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c -index e87f5d6799a7b..568bb290bdce3 100644 +index cdb169348ba9..663fb117cd87 100644 --- a/mm/shmem.c +++ b/mm/shmem.c -@@ -1166,9 +1166,7 @@ static int shmem_getattr(struct mnt_idmap *idmap, - stat->attributes_mask |= (STATX_ATTR_APPEND | - STATX_ATTR_IMMUTABLE | - STATX_ATTR_NODUMP); +@@ -1077,9 +1077,7 @@ static int shmem_getattr(struct user_namespace *mnt_userns, + shmem_recalc_inode(inode); + spin_unlock_irq(&info->lock); + } - inode_lock_shared(inode); - generic_fillattr(idmap, request_mask, inode, stat); + generic_fillattr(&init_user_ns, inode, stat); - inode_unlock_shared(inode); - if (shmem_huge_global_enabled(inode, 0, 0, false, NULL, 0)) + if (shmem_is_huge(NULL, inode, 0)) stat->blksize = HPAGE_PMD_SIZE; +-- +2.47.0.338.g60cca15819-goog + --- Results of testing on various branches: | Branch | Patch Apply | Build Test | |---------------------------|-------------|------------| | stable/linux-5.15.y | Success | Failed | Build Errors: Build error for stable/linux-5.15.y:Sorry, I've not received a mail like this before, and don't know what action to take in response to it. I notice that this 5.15 one says Build Test Failed: that's a surprise, it built for me on 5.15.173; but perhaps something has gone into the queue since then which causes it not to build? Or perhaps this is just a bot mail to be ignored?
It's something we're trying out to improve our efficiency around picking up backports from the mailing list. Given the bot failed to attach a build log, it seems like an issue with the bot that I'll go fix. Sorry for the noise. -- Thanks, Sasha
