From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leon Romanovsky Subject: Re: crash in 4.14-rc1 with IPoIB Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 20:29:35 +0300 Message-ID: <20170923172935.GZ5788@mtr-leonro.local> References: <20170920095339.zhfymeyfbhiyepz5@linux-x5ow.site> <20170920163237.GD536@obsidianresearch.com> <1506101272.5172.11.camel@redhat.com> <20170922194834.GA26479@obsidianresearch.com> <1506114386.120853.2.camel@redhat.com> <20170922211727.GA2348@obsidianresearch.com> <1506120161.120853.10.camel@redhat.com> <20170923073843.GX5788@mtr-leonro.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="K5z5w9fsx/Hrkgg3" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "Estrin, Alex" Cc: Doug Ledford , Jason Gunthorpe , Johannes Thumshirn , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Thomas Bogendoerfer , Bart Van Assche , Christoph Hellwig , Sagi Grimberg List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org --K5z5w9fsx/Hrkgg3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 04:17:10PM +0000, Estrin, Alex wrote: > Hello, > > One minor note regarding the original commit 523633359224 > that broke the core. > It seem it was let through without trivial validation, > otherwise it wouldn't pass the checkpatch. Can you be more specific? Are you referring to "WARNING: line over 80 characters" or to something else? If yes, I feel really bad for you and your workplace. Readability is a first priority for the submitted code. =E2=9E=9C linux-rdma git:(rdma-rc) git fp -1 523633359224 -o /tmp/ /tmp/0001-IB-core-Fix-the-validations-of-a-multicast-LID-in-at.patch =E2=9E=9C linux-rdma git:(rdma-rc) ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict /tmp/0= 001-IB-core-Fix-the-validations-of-a-multicast-LID-in-at.patch WARNING: line over 80 characters #45: FILE: drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c:1584: + if (qp->device->get_link_layer(qp->device, attr.port_num) !=3D total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 checks, 62 lines checked NOTE: For some of the reported defects, checkpatch may be able to mechanically convert to the typical style using --fix or --fix-inplac= e. /tmp/0001-IB-core-Fix-the-validations-of-a-multicast-LID-in-at.patch has st= yle problems, please review. NOTE: If any of the errors are false positives, please report them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS. > > Thanks, > Alex. > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 06:42:41PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: > > > On Fri, 2017-09-22 at 15:17 -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 05:06:26PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: > > > > > > > > > Sure, I get that, but I was already out on PTO on the 30th. What > > > > > sucks > > > > > is that it landed right after I was out. But I plan to have the > > > > > pull > > > > > request in before EOB today, so the difference between the 20th a= nd > > > > > today is neglible. Especially since lots of people doing QA > > > > > testing > > > > > prefer to take -rc tags, in that case, the difference is non- > > > > > existent. > > > > > > > > My thinking was that people should test -rc, > > > > > > Great, with you here... > > > > > > > but if they have problems > > > > they could grab your for-rc branch and check if their issue is > > > > already > > > > fixed.. > > > > > > They can do this too... > > > > > > But if that still doesn't resolve their problem, a quick check of the > > > mailing list contents isn't out of the question either. In that case, > > > they would have found the solution to their problem. But, when you g= et > > > right down to it, only one person reported it in addition to the > > > original poster, so either other people saw the original post and > > > compensated in their own testing, or (the more likely I think), most > > > people don't start testing -rcs until after -rc2. > > > > I don't know about other people, but our testing of -rc starts on -rc1 > > and we are not waiting for -rc2. From my observe of netdev, they also > > start to test -rc immediately. > > > > Otherwise, what is the point of the week between -rc1 and -rc2? > > > > > Which is why I try to set -rc2 as a milestone for several purposes. > > > For getting in the bulk of the known fixes, but also as a branching > > > point for for-next. > > > > > > -- > > > Doug Ledford > > > GPG KeyID: B826A3330E572FDD > > > Key fingerprint =3D AE6B 1BDA 122B 23B4 265B 1274 B826 A333 0E57= 2FDD > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in > the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html --K5z5w9fsx/Hrkgg3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEkhr/r4Op1/04yqaB5GN7iDZyWKcFAlnGmf8ACgkQ5GN7iDZy WKeTQw//aagJFGKGwzr9SBqW19xCGZovUCe9e/W8vM5l9cKnb2p5osmzXxoFyEZz cSyUgEl0MeBkE6UK0Sm56QwwoD0VDYCADbOuXnH57UWRSeul8sBugjbKw052xq5W fCwgj3fljSc/A+rT4i4BLFyAjw/KpNqkImPfkvo6rdDiHJq6by8zKRiS0JtMGxgl Lmb8evCKqS4xPqvlXf6/GMZ9XPqz2IhQeJ+WRaidzzaTgRX8rhoKjM7zuTtIiPGh sYZF80I0R5/y6OaAoaFYKJ26EFodkipr7Ua0fmPF7Mt3rOV3ijpYJ2EAvarD9sKF M5xk1yXOZqDtdrTqVJHaVI4aq4p6m5qOqMnRnCbbiV6b9fBG0kzq1Voxl+UnhXgI ExoxVHH0OvAJARKcXTVAVMpJBqQhbEVMpnX57BQfqnbul5KsZfh8WHArCz0JAP8Z Gjm3SOKC7nXWeQPnZxM1p5P2alQ6YBD4/ncrKWrkZ8Jsnjt8SlCLYLs0EEhWPXC9 pvmIudYz24rtiP87HY+GztTsFacasLw5aBdEjsUiBXAAvIRz9hthjbZDGLisgxWz zAH4QJQZevFz7uY7wbNAExlHx+/AIiN6s6ZEe835mXkg6HIuQPEgn+ayvWrVYcA0 QfZkZUQSZa89AfnKdyVq0K101m7OM2ZkO5T3zUzZvPcJQRaSEKE= =7rHx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --K5z5w9fsx/Hrkgg3-- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html