Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-43656-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <202401291043.e62e89dc-oliver.sang@intel.com> <CAHk-=wh0M=e8R=ZXxa4vesLTtvGmYWJ-w1VmXxW5Mva=Nimk4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240129120125.605e97af@gandalf.local.home> <CAHk-=wghx8Abyx_jcSrCDuNj96SuWS0NvNMhfU8VjFGg9bgm_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=whb91PWEaEJpRGsuWaQpYZGj98ji8HC2vvHD4xb_TqhJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wgp7UkG31=cCcbSdhMv6-vBJ=orktUOUdiLzw4tQ4gDLg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240129152600.7587d1aa@gandalf.local.home> <CAHk-=wghobf5qCqNUsafkQzNAZBJiS0=7CRjNXNChpoAvTbvUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240129172200.1725f01b@gandalf.local.home> <CAHk-=wjV6+U1FQ8wzQ5ASmqGgby+GZ6wpdh0NrJgA43mc+TEwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wgOxTeTi02C=kOXsHzuD6XCrV0L1zk1XP9t+a4Wx--xvA@mail.gmail.com> <20240129174950.5a17a86c@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <20240129174950.5a17a86c@gandalf.local.home>
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:01:25 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wjbzw3=nwR5zGH9jqXgB8jj03wxWfdFDn=oAVCoymQQJg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [eventfs] 852e46e239: BUG:unable_to_handle_page_fault_for_address
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>, oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev, lkp@intel.com, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>, 
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>, 
	Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, 
	Ajay Kaher <ajay.kaher@broadcom.com>, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 at 14:49, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> Now I didn't change this last d_instantiate, because this is not called
> through the lookup code. This is the root events directory and acts more
> like debugfs. It's not "dynamically" added.

Ahh, yes, I see, the dentry was created (as a negative one) with
tracefs_start_creating() -> lookup_one_len().

So  yes, there d_instantiate() is correct, as it's exactly that "turn
negative dentry into a positive one" case.

I'll go see what's up with the "create it again" case - I don't
immediately see what's wrong.

              Linus