Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 9 Dec 2022 13:00:01 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PULL] Networking for v6.1 final / v6.1-rc9 (with the diff stat
 :S)
Message-ID: <20221209130001.0f90f7f8@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wji_NB6hO+35Ruty3DjQkZ+0MkAG9RZpfXNTiWv4NZH3w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20221208205639.1799257-1-kuba@kernel.org>
        <20221208210009.1799399-1-kuba@kernel.org>
        <CAHk-=wji_NB6hO+35Ruty3DjQkZ+0MkAG9RZpfXNTiWv4NZH3w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 10:25:09 -0800 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > There is an outstanding regression in BPF / Peter's static calls stuff,  
> 
> Looks like it's not related to the static calls. Jiri says that
> reverting that static call change makes no difference, and currently
> suspects a RCU race instead:
> 
>   https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/Y5M9P95l85oMHki9@krava/T/#t
> 
> Hmm?

Yes. I can't quickly grok how the static call changes impacted 
the locking. I'll poke the BPF people to give us a sense of urgency.
IDK how likely it is to get hold of Peter Z..