From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 14:43:11 +0000 Subject: Re: linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Message-Id: <20200624144311.GA5839@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: References: <20200610154923.27510-5-mcgrof@kernel.org> <20200623141157.5409-1-borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <3118dc0d-a3af-9337-c897-2380062a8644@de.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <3118dc0d-a3af-9337-c897-2380062a8644@de.ibm.com> To: Christian Borntraeger Cc: mcgrof@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, bfields@fieldses.org, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, chainsaw@gentoo.org, christian.brauner@ubuntu.com, chuck.lever@oracle.com, davem@davemloft.net, dhowells@redhat.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com, jmorris@namei.org, josh@joshtriplett.org, keescook@chromium.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, kuba@kernel.org, lars.ellenberg@linbit.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com, philipp.reisner@linbit.com, ravenexp@gmail.com, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com, serge@hallyn.com, slyfox@gentoo.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, yangtiezhu@loongson.cn, netdev@vger.kernel.org, markward@linux.ibm.com, linux-s390 On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 01:11:54PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > Does anyone have an idea why "umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used" breaks the > linux-bridge on s390? Are we even sure this is s390 specific and doesn't happen on other architectures with the same bridge setup? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11611C433DF for ; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 14:44:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E450220578 for ; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 14:44:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="IOKw7hTc" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2391239AbgFXOoO (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2020 10:44:14 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52698 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2389836AbgFXOoM (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2020 10:44:12 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:8b0:10b:1236::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2292C061573; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 07:44:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=MmxB8m2YTQX4GpqX+DS37OeRO131e4ndrA9Pl7MwAgc=; b=IOKw7hTcqP1QeelKxku2fGErUp y+gPHThYulPLcw9ZipHA3WEiY0WwtrldwMIjz3I7xFlS4UrXh0IrgE+Nr+g3IVn/C5NubV4TtA66n mLCdiZe84XJ5gE3144uUmasV1evosCnueCmLRk8e5igFHS/jiN+zd4BOILHYYRSu5tnwTTHYczGNM 1jNp5/TmBH3r+Cd233b/d63zVr4Nez7dPM6LjZYPehQuohr79GeKnvEyrBvDcVSHQMeCupwKnSb4b k2SF0UgTWsWjSf1WxnC6wYcLs8KKkTGGpdaa+3jajs+y6awdDlv2/jH3uD+C53erVvC46axMeuEel iaiP6SWQ==; Received: from hch by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jo6cJ-0001Xw-5j; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 14:43:11 +0000 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 15:43:11 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Christian Borntraeger Cc: mcgrof@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, bfields@fieldses.org, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, chainsaw@gentoo.org, christian.brauner@ubuntu.com, chuck.lever@oracle.com, davem@davemloft.net, dhowells@redhat.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com, jmorris@namei.org, josh@joshtriplett.org, keescook@chromium.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, kuba@kernel.org, lars.ellenberg@linbit.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com, philipp.reisner@linbit.com, ravenexp@gmail.com, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com, serge@hallyn.com, slyfox@gentoo.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, yangtiezhu@loongson.cn, netdev@vger.kernel.org, markward@linux.ibm.com, linux-s390 Subject: Re: linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Message-ID: <20200624144311.GA5839@infradead.org> References: <20200610154923.27510-5-mcgrof@kernel.org> <20200623141157.5409-1-borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <3118dc0d-a3af-9337-c897-2380062a8644@de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3118dc0d-a3af-9337-c897-2380062a8644@de.ibm.com> X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by casper.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 01:11:54PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > Does anyone have an idea why "umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used" breaks the > linux-bridge on s390? Are we even sure this is s390 specific and doesn't happen on other architectures with the same bridge setup? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=MmxB8m2YTQX4GpqX+DS37OeRO131e4ndrA9Pl7MwAgc=; b=IOKw7hTcqP1QeelKxku2fGErUp y+gPHThYulPLcw9ZipHA3WEiY0WwtrldwMIjz3I7xFlS4UrXh0IrgE+Nr+g3IVn/C5NubV4TtA66n mLCdiZe84XJ5gE3144uUmasV1evosCnueCmLRk8e5igFHS/jiN+zd4BOILHYYRSu5tnwTTHYczGNM 1jNp5/TmBH3r+Cd233b/d63zVr4Nez7dPM6LjZYPehQuohr79GeKnvEyrBvDcVSHQMeCupwKnSb4b k2SF0UgTWsWjSf1WxnC6wYcLs8KKkTGGpdaa+3jajs+y6awdDlv2/jH3uD+C53erVvC46axMeuEel iaiP6SWQ==; From: Christoph Hellwig Message-ID: <20200624144311.GA5839@infradead.org> References: <20200610154923.27510-5-mcgrof@kernel.org> <20200623141157.5409-1-borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <3118dc0d-a3af-9337-c897-2380062a8644@de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3118dc0d-a3af-9337-c897-2380062a8644@de.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 14:43:30 -0000 To: Christian Borntraeger Cc: ast@kernel.org, jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com, philipp.reisner@linbit.com, dhowells@redhat.com, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, mcgrof@kernel.org, christian.brauner@ubuntu.com, yangtiezhu@loongson.cn, linux-s390 , bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, jmorris@namei.org, kuba@kernel.org, serge@hallyn.com, keescook@chromium.org, nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, slyfox@gentoo.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, axboe@kernel.dk, bfields@fieldses.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, chainsaw@gentoo.org, ravenexp@gmail.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, markward@linux.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, chuck.lever@oracle.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, lars.ellenberg@linbit.com, davem@davemloft.net On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 01:11:54PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > Does anyone have an idea why "umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used" breaks the > linux-bridge on s390? Are we even sure this is s390 specific and doesn't happen on other architectures with the same bridge setup?