RE: [PATCH 0/6] ACPICA: Interpreter: Improve lock order fixes

[Zheng, Lv]

Hi, Rafael

> From: linux-acpi-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-acpi-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Zheng,
> Lv
> Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 11:17 PM
> To: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx>; Lv Zheng <zetalog@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Wysocki, Rafael J <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>; Rafael J . Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Brown, Len
> <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx>; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; ACPI Devel Maling
> List <linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/6] ACPICA: Interpreter: Improve lock order fixes
> 
> Hi, Rafael
> 
> > From: linux-acpi-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-acpi-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rafael
> J.
> > Wysocki
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] ACPICA: Interpreter: Improve lock order fixes
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 7:20 AM, Lv Zheng <zetalog@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > This patchset improves ACPICA intepreter lock order fixes. Including
> > > several urgent regression fixes [PATCH 0-3].
> >
> > OK, thanks!
> >
> > So patches [4-6/6] appear to be cleanups and I'd prefer them to be
> > applied in a usual way (ie. via the upstream ACPICA).
> 
> I think PATCH 4 is also an urgent fix.
> On certain table loading mode (we have 3 now).
> When acpi_ds_initialize_objects() is invoked, acpi_ds_initialize_region() will be invoked.
> While in other modes, it will be invoked in acpi_ds_load2_end_op(), so no-op in
> acpi_ds_initialize_objects().
> 
> When it is not no-op in acpi_ds_initialize_objects(), the wrong returning value becomes an exception
> preventing the table from being correctly loaded/initialized.

I'll stop including PATCH 4 in the regression fix series.
I cannot find the original triggering case right here right now.
I'll think it's not urgent.
Sorry for the noise.

Thanks
Lv

> 
> [PATCH 5-6] are cleanups.
> 
> >
> > I'd like to take the [1-3/6] as fixes for 4.9-rc3 though, but for that
> > I need you to tell me which mainline kernel commits are fixed by them.
> >
> > IOW, what should I put into the Fixes: tags.
> >
> > [In the future, if you post a regression fix, please always add a
> > FIxes: tag to it pointing to the commit being fixed.]
> 
> OK, I'll add the Fixes tag and re-send the patches.
> 
> Thanks and best regards
> Lv
> 
> >
> > > Patches tested with customized ACPI table where _PS0/_PS3 methods are
> > > customized to invoke a serialized control method which creates named
> > > objects. When pm_async=yes, AE_ALREADY_EXISTS can be seen in suspend/resume
> > > process. This is an existing issue, triggered in 4.9-rc1 by ACPICA
> > > interpreter lock order fixes, and can be fixed by [PATCH 1] in this series.
> > >
> > > Lv Zheng (6):
> > >   ACPICA: Dispatcher: Fix order issue of method termination
> > >   ACPICA: Dispatcher: Fix an unbalanced lock exit path in
> > >     acpi_ds_auto_serialize_method()
> > >   ACPICA: Dispatcher: Tune interpreter lock around
> > >     acpi_ev_initialize_region()
> > >   ACPICA: Events: Cleanup acpi_ev_initialize_region()
> > >   ACPICA: Tables: Cleanup acpi_tb_install_and_load_table()
> > >   ACPICA: Tables: Add acpi_tb_unload_table()
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rafael
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> ï{.nï+ïïïïïïï+%ïïlzwmïïbïëïïrïïzXïïïï(ïïïïÜ}ïïïÆzï&j:+vïïï
ïïïïzZ+ïï+zfïïïhïïï~ïïïïiïïïzïïwïïï?ïï
> ïï&ï)ßf