Message-ID: <78883f84-dceb-9b24-b1f3-321d84091a85@huawei.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Jan 2023 16:23:19 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.2.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5.10] arm64: fix a concurrency issue in
 emulation_proc_handler()
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
CC:     <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, <will@kernel.org>,
        <haibinzhang@tencent.com>, <hewenliang4@huawei.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20230131065211.2826133-1-ruanjinjie@huawei.com>
 <Y9jC2msv2q39+ZA1@kroah.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Ruan Jinjie <ruanjinjie@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <Y9jC2msv2q39+ZA1@kroah.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 2023/1/31 15:27, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 02:52:11PM +0800, ruanjinjie wrote:
>> This patch is addressing an issue in stable linux-5.10 only.
>>
>> In linux-6.1, the related code is refactored in 124c49b1b("arm64:
>> armv8_deprecated: rework deprected instruction handling") and
>> this issue was incidentally fixed. However, the patch changes a lot and
>> is not specific to this issue.
> 
> Then what about 5.15.y?  You can not upgrade to that kernel and have a
> regression, right?

This patch has a pre-dependency af483947d ("arm64: fix oops in
concurrently setting insn_emulation sysctls"), which has not merged into
branches except 5.10.y, so the other branches don't apply.

> 
> And nit, you need a ' ' before the '(' character.
> 
> But why can we just not take the original commit that fixed this issue?
> That way almost always is the best (prevents regressions, makes
> backports easier, is actually tested, etc.) ?

Thank you! It is ok to take the original commit to fix this issue.

> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h