2023-09-01 00:26:43

by Steven Rostedt

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: zero the pipe cpumask on alloc to avoid spurious -EBUSY

On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 21:51:18 +0800
Zheng Yejian <[email protected]> wrote:

> > Hi,
> >
> > I ran into this problem just recently on one of my test VMs immediately
> > after updating to a v6.5 base. A revert of the aforementioned commit
> > addressed the problem. I'm not terribly familiar with the tracing code,
> > but on further inspection I noticed the cpumask doesn't appear to be
> > initialized anywhere. I suppose this could alternatively do a
> > cpumask_clear() or whatever after allocation, but either way this
> > addresses the problem for me.
>
> Yes, pipe_cpumask must be initialized.

Can I add a Reviewed-by tag from you?

>
> >
> > Please CC on replies as I'm not subscribed to the list. Thanks.

That's the default with Linux kernel lists.

-- Steve


2023-09-01 16:11:18

by Zheng Yejian

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: zero the pipe cpumask on alloc to avoid spurious -EBUSY

On 2023/9/1 04:33, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 21:51:18 +0800
> Zheng Yejian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I ran into this problem just recently on one of my test VMs immediately
>>> after updating to a v6.5 base. A revert of the aforementioned commit
>>> addressed the problem. I'm not terribly familiar with the tracing code,
>>> but on further inspection I noticed the cpumask doesn't appear to be
>>> initialized anywhere. I suppose this could alternatively do a
>>> cpumask_clear() or whatever after allocation, but either way this
>>> addresses the problem for me.
>>
>> Yes, pipe_cpumask must be initialized.
>
> Can I add a Reviewed-by tag from you?

Of course :)
Reviewed-by: Zheng Yejian <[email protected]>

--

Thanks,
Zheng Yejian

>
>>
>>>
>>> Please CC on replies as I'm not subscribed to the list. Thanks.
>
> That's the default with Linux kernel lists.
>
> -- Steve
>