Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-46906-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 12:28:44 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.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
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [eventfs] 852e46e239:
 BUG:unable_to_handle_page_fault_for_address
Message-ID: <20240131122844.5683dfe0@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <20240131111358.5506645a@gandalf.local.home>
References: <202401291043.e62e89dc-oliver.sang@intel.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>
	<CAHk-=wjbzw3=nwR5zGH9jqXgB8jj03wxWfdFDn=oAVCoymQQJg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20240129193549.265f32c8@gandalf.local.home>
	<CAHk-=whRxcmjvGNBKi9_x59cAedh8SO8wsNDNrEQbAQfM5A8CQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHk-=wh97AkwaOkXoBgf0z8EP88ePffLnTcmmQXcY+AhFaFrnA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20240130132319.022817e8@gandalf.local.home>
	<CAHk-=wiGb2aDbtq2+mYv6C=pYRKmo_iOu9feL9o52iRT8cuh6Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<20240130143734.31b9b3f1@gandalf.local.home>
	<CAHk-=whMJgqu2v1_Uopg5NBschGFa_BK1Ct=s7ehwnzPpPi6nQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20240131105847.3e9afcb8@gandalf.local.home>
	<20240131111358.5506645a@gandalf.local.home>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 11:13:58 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 10:58:47 -0500
> Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> 
> > @@ -788,6 +717,7 @@ static void init_once(void *foo)
> >  {
> >  	struct tracefs_inode *ti = (struct tracefs_inode *) foo;
> >  
> > +	memset(ti, 0, sizeof(*ti));
> >  	inode_init_once(&ti->vfs_inode);
> >  }
> >    
> 
> Note, that inode_init_once() also does a memset on the entire inode, so the
> initial memset is redundant on the inode portion. But I didn't think it was
> really worth the time to complicate the code by optimizing it. I guess if I
> changed the structure to:
> 
>  struct tracefs_inode {
> +	struct inode            vfs_inode;
> 	unsigned long           flags;
> 	void                    *private;
> -	struct inode            vfs_inode;
>  };
> 
> I could have it do:
> 
> 	memset_after(ti, 0, vfs_inode);
> 
> But this can be done as a separate clean up and doesn't need to be done now.
> 

Hmm, since I need to run all the tests again, I think I'll change this
patch to do the above.

-- Steve