Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-99355-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 19:21:18 +0100
From: Petr =?UTF-8?B?VGVzYcWZw61r?= <petr@tesarici.cz>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, Linux regressions mailing list
 <regressions@lists.linux.dev>, open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
 "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
 <regressions@leemhuis.info>, stable@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] u64_stats: fix u64_stats_init() for lockdep when
 used repeatedly in one file
Message-ID: <20240311192118.31cfc1fb@meshulam.tesarici.cz>
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iKQpSaF5KG5=dT_o=WBeZtCiLcN768eUdYvUew-dLbKaA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20240306111157.29327-1-petr@tesarici.cz>
	<20240311182516.1e2eebd8@meshulam.tesarici.cz>
	<CANn89iKQpSaF5KG5=dT_o=WBeZtCiLcN768eUdYvUew-dLbKaA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 18:43:59 +0100
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 6:25=E2=80=AFPM Petr Tesa=C5=99=C3=ADk <petr@tesa=
rici.cz> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed,  6 Mar 2024 12:11:57 +0100
> > Petr Tesarik <petr@tesarici.cz> wrote:
> > =20
> > > Fix bogus lockdep warnings if multiple u64_stats_sync variables are
> > > initialized in the same file.
> > >
> > > With CONFIG_LOCKDEP, seqcount_init() is a macro which declares:
> > >
> > >       static struct lock_class_key __key;
> > >
> > > Since u64_stats_init() is a function (albeit an inline one), all calls
> > > within the same file end up using the same instance, effectively trea=
ting
> > > them all as a single lock-class. =20
> >
> > What happens with this fix now?
> >
> > IIUC it should be reviewed by Eric, but I don't know through which tree
> > it should be merged. Any plans yet? =20
>=20
> I thought I gave a reply, but apparently not .
>=20
> Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>

Thank you!

Petr T