Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-133841-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2024 09:44:49 +0200
From: Petr =?UTF-8?B?VGVzYcWZw61r?= <petr@tesarici.cz>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, open list
 <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, Linux regressions mailing list
 <regressions@lists.linux.dev>, open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
 "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)" <regressions@leemhuis.info>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] u64_stats: fix u64_stats_init() for lockdep when
 used repeatedly in one file
Message-ID: <20240406094449.1ac182d0@meshulam.tesarici.cz>
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iLZ9rkSpT6crP89RV-GPSnSxhUkjPSSh3PmiLNDH103yQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20240404075740.30682-1-petr@tesarici.cz>
	<CANn89iLZ9rkSpT6crP89RV-GPSnSxhUkjPSSh3PmiLNDH103yQ@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 23:08:58 +0200
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 9:58=E2=80=AFAM Petr Tesarik <petr@tesarici.cz> wr=
ote:
> >
> > 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 treati=
ng
> > them all as a single lock-class.
> >
> > Fixes: 9464ca650008 ("net: make u64_stats_init() a function")
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/ea1567d9-ce66-45e6-8168-ac40a47d=
1821@roeck-us.net/
> > Signed-off-by: Petr Tesarik <petr@tesarici.cz> =20
>=20
> I thought I gave a Reviewed-by: tag already...

You did, but at that time I didn't know which tree should be used to
merge the patch, so it appeared as a stranded patch on LKML. Once we
agreed it should go through net, I sent it again, but the resend didn't
have it.

Thanks for your assistance!

Petr T

> Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>