From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luis Chamberlain Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 11:50:40 +0000 Subject: Re: linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Message-Id: <20200626115040.GN13911@42.do-not-panic.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: References: <9e767819-9bbe-2181-521e-4d8ca28ca4f7@de.ibm.com> <20200624160953.GH4332@42.do-not-panic.com> <4e27098e-ac8d-98f0-3a9a-ea25242e24ec@de.ibm.com> <4d8fbcea-a892-3453-091f-d57c03f9aa90@de.ibm.com> <1263e370-7cee-24d8-b98c-117bf7c90a83@de.ibm.com> <20200626025410.GJ4332@42.do-not-panic.com> <20200626090001.GA30103@infradead.org> <20200626114008.GK4332@42.do-not-panic.com> In-Reply-To: <20200626114008.GK4332@42.do-not-panic.com> To: Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton Cc: Christian Borntraeger , 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 Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 11:40:08AM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > Andrew, can you please revert these two for now: > > selftests: simplify kmod failure value > umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used > > Later, we'll add Christoph's simplier kernel wait, and make the change > directly there to catpure the right error. That still won't fix this reported > issue, but it will be cleaner and will go tested by Christian Borntraeger > before. However, note that the only consideration to make here against this approach of the fix later going in with the simpler kernel wait is if this actually is fixing a real issue, and if we'd want this going to stable. We should for sure revert though, so Andrew please do proceed to revert or drop those two patches alone for now. It was unclear to me if this should go to stable given I was not sure how severe that NFS case mentioned on the commit log was, and no one on the NFS side has replied about that yet, however there may be other areas where code inspection of callsites was not sufficient to find the real critical areas. I'm now very curious what this issue that Christian with bridge on s390 found will be. Luis 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=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 1E83BC433E0 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 11:50:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5C7120857 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 11:50:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1593172247; bh=lUnZgFb4OU9GSJtoo2/dR+RKdUvWEPkvOcpgO/247nc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=09zXx16HCVl6irnW/K02hHV72ZHntMshsTjr7DQ41a8HZUROfD7MjLpeITAnfGWGs gsDX3a4PgVBUouji6RRib8yW+GK4gBifG4B0xZj0jBDK63JG45q4UtgDFiObUiZHv9 waTF6Bad1oWtg5yV4KYJotfeTozChG1CwriobHi4= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728874AbgFZLup (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jun 2020 07:50:45 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f194.google.com ([209.85.214.194]:39127 "EHLO mail-pl1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725884AbgFZLuo (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jun 2020 07:50:44 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f194.google.com with SMTP id s14so4191378plq.6; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:50:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=m6IlfQ2e8V9TPNspezYLF8SplDOhvC9AL7TcXaCoLTk=; b=OQZxqT3mZBVUFtAHYWFqkOtO3QCJKc7upfuQZW2bxqPD+cPkiLUJxE7P/dxwjx6VbR YDDJHHAQrLVNHloqBHOIGMh0OKaYBLB+BaYYKPgjKC4hbDtXMiM3oJRLGs4mXNrGKpsl f0p4yVh487Mn24jw2PO51M3Ifws+/eLdrS2dgUAvdP86+KOA5rp87DNMrKyC7bDKjeRd P8Y3ChhutOUXuuWWrVXiiYKDFDVEFscrIM05e82dWfGYSp6k2lebN/kzm7bkZLmCBVFu 6ygkwEhpaKcCOX6vpII5PAHGhisivsqUY/WbgZ62z36yQR2pnbiE+EpgJwvcDui8+Pr+ d8zA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5315s1Zh7GAvbf/+hiwuXqDytkwvwwFaFjegKn2kJN5GvDP7b/l0 iufu1Ya9FWmZdN6hVmcaGpw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw+vfjYwkjyjOXkCMgArijGLXv7vSz+rOJhbL995GWA76AlNmn2PvrbvK5DZHp9UnPtP91fyw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7896:: with SMTP id q22mr2327903pll.237.1593172243027; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:50:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 42.do-not-panic.com (42.do-not-panic.com. [157.230.128.187]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m136sm11584572pfd.218.2020.06.26.04.50.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:50:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 42.do-not-panic.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BD85E40B24; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 11:50:40 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 11:50:40 +0000 From: Luis Chamberlain To: Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton Cc: Christian Borntraeger , 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: <20200626115040.GN13911@42.do-not-panic.com> References: <9e767819-9bbe-2181-521e-4d8ca28ca4f7@de.ibm.com> <20200624160953.GH4332@42.do-not-panic.com> <4e27098e-ac8d-98f0-3a9a-ea25242e24ec@de.ibm.com> <4d8fbcea-a892-3453-091f-d57c03f9aa90@de.ibm.com> <1263e370-7cee-24d8-b98c-117bf7c90a83@de.ibm.com> <20200626025410.GJ4332@42.do-not-panic.com> <20200626090001.GA30103@infradead.org> <20200626114008.GK4332@42.do-not-panic.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200626114008.GK4332@42.do-not-panic.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 11:40:08AM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > Andrew, can you please revert these two for now: > > selftests: simplify kmod failure value > umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used > > Later, we'll add Christoph's simplier kernel wait, and make the change > directly there to catpure the right error. That still won't fix this reported > issue, but it will be cleaner and will go tested by Christian Borntraeger > before. However, note that the only consideration to make here against this approach of the fix later going in with the simpler kernel wait is if this actually is fixing a real issue, and if we'd want this going to stable. We should for sure revert though, so Andrew please do proceed to revert or drop those two patches alone for now. It was unclear to me if this should go to stable given I was not sure how severe that NFS case mentioned on the commit log was, and no one on the NFS side has replied about that yet, however there may be other areas where code inspection of callsites was not sufficient to find the real critical areas. I'm now very curious what this issue that Christian with bridge on s390 found will be. Luis From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Luis Chamberlain Message-ID: <20200626115040.GN13911@42.do-not-panic.com> References: <9e767819-9bbe-2181-521e-4d8ca28ca4f7@de.ibm.com> <20200624160953.GH4332@42.do-not-panic.com> <4e27098e-ac8d-98f0-3a9a-ea25242e24ec@de.ibm.com> <4d8fbcea-a892-3453-091f-d57c03f9aa90@de.ibm.com> <1263e370-7cee-24d8-b98c-117bf7c90a83@de.ibm.com> <20200626025410.GJ4332@42.do-not-panic.com> <20200626090001.GA30103@infradead.org> <20200626114008.GK4332@42.do-not-panic.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200626114008.GK4332@42.do-not-panic.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: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 11:50:44 -0000 To: Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton Cc: ast@kernel.org, jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com, philipp.reisner@linbit.com, dhowells@redhat.com, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, christian.brauner@ubuntu.com, yangtiezhu@loongson.cn, linux-s390 , bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, jmorris@namei.org, Christian Borntraeger , 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 Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 11:40:08AM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > Andrew, can you please revert these two for now: > > selftests: simplify kmod failure value > umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used > > Later, we'll add Christoph's simplier kernel wait, and make the change > directly there to catpure the right error. That still won't fix this reported > issue, but it will be cleaner and will go tested by Christian Borntraeger > before. However, note that the only consideration to make here against this approach of the fix later going in with the simpler kernel wait is if this actually is fixing a real issue, and if we'd want this going to stable. We should for sure revert though, so Andrew please do proceed to revert or drop those two patches alone for now. It was unclear to me if this should go to stable given I was not sure how severe that NFS case mentioned on the commit log was, and no one on the NFS side has replied about that yet, however there may be other areas where code inspection of callsites was not sufficient to find the real critical areas. I'm now very curious what this issue that Christian with bridge on s390 found will be. Luis