Re: [PATCH 5.4 000/191] 5.4.8-stable review

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 4:45 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 04:29:56PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 4:25 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 4:03 PM Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 3 Jan 2020 at 03:42, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > > > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > -ENOENT is what you get when hugetlbfs is not mounted, so this hints to
> > >
> > > 8fc312b32b2  mm/hugetlbfs: fix error handling when setting up mounts
> > >
> > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git/commit/?h=linux-5.4.y&id=3f549fb42a39bea3b29c0fc12afee53c4a01bec9
> >
> > I see that Mike Kravetz suggested not putting this patch into stable in
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/befca227-cb8a-8f47-617d-e3bf9972bfec@xxxxxxxxxx/
> >
> > but it was picked through the autosel mechanism later.
>
> So does that mean that Linus's tree shows this LTP failure as well?

Yes, according to
https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-mainline-oe/tests/ltp-syscalls-tests/memfd_create04
mainline has the same testcase failure, it started happening between
v5.4-10135-gc3bfc5dd73c6 and v5.4-10271-g596cf45cbf6e, when the patch
was originally merged into 5.5-rc1.

> This does seem to fix a real issue, as shown by the LTP test noticing
> it, so should the error code value be fixed in Linus's tree?

No idea what to conclude from the testcase failure, let's see if Mike has
any suggestions.

      Arnd