Re: [RESEND PATCH v2] of: fix kmemleak crash caused by imbalance in early memory reservation

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:03:09 -0600 Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 10:47 AM Marc Gonzalez <marc.w.gonzalez@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On 04/02/2019 15:37, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
> >  
> > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # 3.15+
> > > Fixes: 3f0c820664483 ("drivers: of: add initialization code for dynamic reserved memory")
> > > Acked-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Acked-by: Prateek Patel <prpatel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Tested-by: Marc Gonzalez <marc.w.gonzalez@xxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > Resend with DT CCed to reach robh's patch queue
> > > I added CC: stable, Fixes, and Prateek's ack
> > > Trim recipients list to minimize inconvenience  
> >
> > I'm confused over commit 3532b3b554a216f30edb841d29eef48521bdc592 in linux-next
> > "memblock: drop __memblock_alloc_base()"
> >
> > It's definitely going to conflict with the proposed patch
> > over drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> >
> > Rob, what's the next step then?  
> 
> Rebase it on top of what's in linux-next and apply it to the tree
> which has the above dependency. I'm guessing that is Andrew Morton's
> tree.

Yeah, that is in Andrew's "post linux-next" patch series, so if you
rebase it on top of linux-next and then send it to Andrew with some
explanation.

...

Actually, if it is intended for the stable trees, then presumably it is
intended to go to Linus for the current release?  In which case, the
patch in Andrew's tree will have to be changed to cope after your patch
appears in Linus' tree (and therefore, linux-next).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Attachment: pgpmfH5ecj1Rq.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature