Re: [PATCH 5.10 000/406] 5.10.195-rc1 review
From: Florian Fainelli
Date: Wed Sep 20 2023 - 13:02:06 EST
On 9/20/23 08:18, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 9/20/23 01:11, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 09:57:25PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 9/17/23 12:07, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.10.195 release.
There are 406 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
let me know.
Responses should be made by Tue, 19 Sep 2023 19:10:04 +0000.
Anything received after that time might be too late.
chromeos-5.10 locks up in configfs_lookup() after the merge of
v5.10.195.
I am a bit puzzled because I see
c709c7ca020a configfs: fix a race in configfs_lookup()
in v5.10.195 but not in the list of commits below. I guess I must be
missing something.
It was part of the big patchset, it was posted here:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230917191101.511939651@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Not hidden at all :)
and was submitted here:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/ZPOZFHHA0abVmGx+@westworld
Either case, the code now looks as follows.
configfs_lookup()
{
...
spin_lock(&configfs_dirent_lock);
...
err = configfs_attach_attr(sd, dentry);
...
spin_unlock(&configfs_dirent_lock);
...
}
and
configfs_attach_attr(...)
{
...
spin_lock(&configfs_dirent_lock);
...
}
which unless it is way too late here and I really need to go to sleep
just won't work.
Kyle, you did the backport, any comments?
After a good night sleep, the code still looks wrong to me. Reverting
the offending patch in chromeos-5.10 solved the problem there.
That makes me suspect that no one actually tests configfs.
Humm indeed, looking at our testing we don't have our USB devices being
tested which would exercise configfs since we switch the USB device
between different configurations (mass storage, serial, networking
etc.). Let me see about adding that so we get some coverage.
--
Florian