Received: by 2002:a25:824b:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d11csp6837492ybn; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 04:43:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyggst//IxpQqHyoy6YIRxU4Mi8TNytHd1+W8ISpNOMQikeUN09+hR51copnJZshD37ml+o X-Received: by 2002:a50:e691:: with SMTP id z17mr19142972edm.84.1569843779952; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 04:42:59 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1569843779; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=mM1ctYX61WcHgDDs+c8T7N9XTRiUJNuTGU0JX+/9/53leaaZnmZO8tHjBhFgOM2Axl 6MWza+R+xJ2Hdaw6h12WZcFRe97FK9DnXkltLgGLJcmiln37XC9bDbsWPlsd4+t8K1dC OkKca8LS3fQCNFY3GvxyOSCRRAlN2PlBYfyq8pweb8zNJCZEFl0eblbmZaGoKoLls4L1 XPQAa6Z2ZKMs0/DcrZl8X+Qp8Zka7LJh6G0u6PTYb/+XCzBiKSY5AObNwwUjEazJ2Bhe uq4QdvKVf3dfrdPX93C0mX7ZDgAPz4wmfugQNJ6Fu+N7JYzNIiRoV8ah2jgdplfhZPT6 aCWg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=tzASQgvHnCy0ewxux/u7LLH9a9Xp5L7lTzTRiVi8qQo=; b=VaownshkCBZgrO3EvC+J4sKKG3cTJ3fK3lwFpkahaF/vMdKxyU1xvwn6fT3qI1bjNU 8l5BaY1NLoKdfR4kCR7OLhXP6akscvmkJnJPS8iVlSaryAA/dxZp0ypPKGSu0+qBpFzZ M0SH6kK2auxhL+1EaZ+A6Ub5wim1G2nqVDLPLSL/0a7OdqiUUSzW65Dq+U64TBn7iU4T HydlxLNZo1hGZpDSmCoS1+pjjuk6VxdGy/ztMXAHdFeIA0URqdQcKU3N6pKEiEF9wrgz O8iTArKm4qSVMsQSpPLrEu3KX6L+vVNnT6UBWq9oPgRnHYHA3zT4oFohmQncPmJ0FOEQ mOJg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=default header.b=bHxPk2yp; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id v25si7198297edb.286.2019.09.30.04.42.34; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 04:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=default header.b=bHxPk2yp; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729844AbfI3LgA (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:36:00 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:38082 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727215AbfI3Lf7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:35:59 -0400 Received: from localhost (c-73-47-72-35.hsd1.nh.comcast.net [73.47.72.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D4C17206BB; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 11:35:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1569843359; bh=9WEhA8JA+UBptPyxfyomZDl3eE0Son1at5a6dFCkZpA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=bHxPk2ypvO+UY24J4mkRO/KKATPjdvWvN/rfnLCOSf35scy1gjE532dFE2JC0LvqA BW//GlJwH8DzlwwfXAKUZ8P2Qk6BniW6WeiQHqYIC3UVTnNJlmrBrcLKp88EReX7Z8 a+nOWkYgM8MMhS4ZSeRlo4EHQzx/ACsmMpbdINeQ= Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:35:57 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Tetsuo Handa Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, syzbot+53383ae265fb161ef488@syzkaller.appspotmail.com, Waiman Long , "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , "Paul E. McKenney" , Thomas Gleixner , Will Deacon , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 36/63] locking/lockdep: Add debug_locks check in __lock_downgrade() Message-ID: <20190930113557.GR8171@sasha-vm> References: <20190929135031.382429403@linuxfoundation.org> <20190929135038.482721804@linuxfoundation.org> <801c81d2-ce72-8eb3-a18b-1b0943270fc4@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> <20190930002828.GQ8171@sasha-vm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 10:46:39AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: >On 2019/09/30 9:28, Sasha Levin wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 29, 2019 at 11:43:38PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: >>> On 2019/09/29 22:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>> From: Waiman Long >>>> >>>> [ Upstream commit 513e1073d52e55b8024b4f238a48de7587c64ccf ] >>>> >>>> Tetsuo Handa had reported he saw an incorrect "downgrading a read lock" >>>> warning right after a previous lockdep warning. It is likely that the >>>> previous warning turned off lock debugging causing the lockdep to have >>>> inconsistency states leading to the lock downgrade warning. >>>> >>>> Fix that by add a check for debug_locks at the beginning of >>>> __lock_downgrade(). >>> >>> Please drop "[PATCH 4.19 36/63] locking/lockdep: Add debug_locks check in __lock_downgrade()". >>> We had a revert patch shown below in the past. >> >> We had a revert in the stable trees, but that revert was incorrect. >> >> Take a look at commit 513e1073d52e55 upstream, it patches >> __lock_set_class() (even though the subject line says >> __lock_downgrade()). So this is not a backporting error as the revert >> said it is, but is rather the intended location to be patched. >> >> If this is actually wrong, then it should be addressed upstream first. >> > >Hmm, upstream has two commits with same author, same date, same subject, different hash, different content. >I couldn't find from https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1547093005-26085-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com that >we want to patch both __lock_set_class() and __lock_downgrade(), but I found that the tip-bot has patched >__lock_downgrade() on "2019-01-21 11:29" and __lock_set_class() on "2019-02-04 8:56". >Seems that we by error patched both functions, though patching both functions should be harmless... Right, there's a lot of confusion between the duplicate subject lines and what this patch actually does. My point was that this is an upstream issue rather than a stable issue, we're just aligning with upstream here. -- Thanks, Sasha