On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 00:40 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 12:32:55AM -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 00:15 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 11:44:24PM -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > > > > Hi Martin, > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 21:18 +0200, Martin Svec wrote: > > > > > Hi Nick, > > > > > > > > > > Dne 22.9.2015 v 8:20 Nicholas A. Bellinger napsal(a): > > > > > > Hi Martin, > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2015-09-21 at 17:26 +0200, Martin Svec wrote: > > > > > > > > > > <SNIP> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for this detailed bug report. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is < v4.2 RCU se_node_acl->device_list[] NULL pointer dereference > > > > > > regression that is effecting v4.1.y specific code. > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a compile tested patch to add NULL ->device_list[] sanity checks > > > > > > in UNIT_ATTENTION and PR non holder path code, which AFAICT should get > > > > > > EXTENDED_COPY I/O functioning on v4.1.y. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please verify. > > > > > > > > > > Verified, VAAI XCOPY migration succeeds now. Tested with v4.1.6 plus both XCOPY patches from this > > > > > thread. Thank you for the patch. > > > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > Thanks for verifying these two regression bug-fixes on your ESX VAAI > > > > host setup. > > > > > > > > As the first EXTENDED_COPY regression bugfix in commit 4416f89b has not > > > > merged into v4.2.y code yet, this second patch will need to be going out > > > > to linux-stable over the next days as a for-4.1.y specific bug-fix > > > > patch. > > > > > > > > Adding greg-kh (CC'ed) for a heads up on that bit. > > > > > > <formletter> > > > > > > This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the > > > stable kernel tree. Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt > > > for how to do this properly. > > > > > > </formletter> > > > > Yes. > > > > To clarify, this second EXTENDED_COPY regression bug-fix that Martin has > > reported + tested does _not_ effect any >= v4.2-rc1 RCU post conversion > > target code. > > > > It's a pre RCU conversion regression bug-fix, and is only specific to > > v4.1.y code. > > > > It needs to be posted for review + included as a separate patch for > > v4.1.y stable specific code. > > And by emailing me directly about this, you are guaranteeing I will not > remember what is going on whenever you eventually send me a patch and I > will strongly question it. > > Come on, send stable stuff to the stable mailing list. And send it in > the correct format. You know how to do this type of thing, it's not new > to you. A "I'm going to send you something in some random time in the > future" does no one any good, as I will forget all about this past > email. > > Remember, I receive on an average about 1300 emails a day, not including > high-volume mailing lists (lkml, netdev, etc.) that I have to "process" > in some form or another. That's alot of emails.. > I have the short term memory of a squirrel, > and if you try to send me a stable patch directly, I'll just invoke my > form letter like I did above and delete the email to move on to > something from someone who did it properly. Sent out as: [PATCH-v4.1.y] target: Fix v4.1 UNIT_ATTENTION se_node_acl->device_list[] NULL pointer Apologies for the extra noise. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe target-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
