All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.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 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 17:57:04 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200630175704.GO13911@42.do-not-panic.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200626025410.GJ4332@42.do-not-panic.com>

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 02:54:10AM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 08:37:55PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 24.06.20 20:32, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > [...]> 
> > > So the translations look correct. But your change is actually a sematic change
> > > if(ret) will only trigger if there is an error
> > > if (KWIFEXITED(ret)) will always trigger when the process ends. So we will always overwrite -ECHILD
> > > and we did not do it before. 
> > > 
> > 
> > So the right fix is
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
> > index f81e8698e36e..a3a3196e84d1 100644
> > --- a/kernel/umh.c
> > +++ b/kernel/umh.c
> > @@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ static void call_usermodehelper_exec_sync(struct subprocess_info *sub_info)
> >                  * the real error code is already in sub_info->retval or
> >                  * sub_info->retval is 0 anyway, so don't mess with it then.
> >                  */
> > -               if (KWIFEXITED(ret))
> > +               if (KWEXITSTATUS(ret))
> >                         sub_info->retval = KWEXITSTATUS(ret);
> >         }
> >  
> > I think.
> 
> Nope, the right form is to check for WIFEXITED() before using WEXITSTATUS().
> I'm not able to reproduce this on x86 with a bridge. What type of bridge
> are you using on a guest, or did you mean using KVM so that the *host*
> can spawn kvm guests?
> 
> It would be good if you can try to add a bridge manually and see where
> things fail. Can you do something like this:
> 
> brctl addbr br0
> brctl addif br0 ens6 
> ip link set dev br0 up
> 
> Note that most callers are for modprobe. I'd be curious to see which
> umh is failing which breaks bridge for you. Can you trut this so we can
> see which umh call is failing?

Christian, any luck getting to test the code below to see what this
reveals?

  Luis

> 
> diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
> index f81e8698e36e..5ad74bc301d8 100644
> --- a/kernel/umh.c
> +++ b/kernel/umh.c
> @@ -2,6 +2,9 @@
>  /*
>   * umh - the kernel usermode helper
>   */
> +
> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
> +
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  #include <linux/sched/task.h>
> @@ -154,8 +157,12 @@ static void call_usermodehelper_exec_sync(struct subprocess_info *sub_info)
>  		 * the real error code is already in sub_info->retval or
>  		 * sub_info->retval is 0 anyway, so don't mess with it then.
>  		 */
> -		if (KWIFEXITED(ret))
> +		printk("= ret: %02x\n", ret);
> +		printk("= KWIFEXITED(ret): %02x\n", KWIFEXITED(ret));
> +		if (KWIFEXITED(ret)) {
> +			printk("KWEXITSTATUS(ret): %d\n", KWEXITSTATUS(ret));
>  			sub_info->retval = KWEXITSTATUS(ret);
> +		}
>  	}
>  
>  	/* Restore default kernel sig handler */
> @@ -383,6 +390,7 @@ struct subprocess_info *call_usermodehelper_setup(const char *path, char **argv,
>  		void *data)
>  {
>  	struct subprocess_info *sub_info;
> +	unsigned int i = 0;
>  	sub_info = kzalloc(sizeof(struct subprocess_info), gfp_mask);
>  	if (!sub_info)
>  		goto out;
> @@ -394,6 +402,11 @@ struct subprocess_info *call_usermodehelper_setup(const char *path, char **argv,
>  #else
>  	sub_info->path = path;
>  #endif
> +	pr_info("sub_info->path: %s\n", sub_info->path);
> +	while (argv[i])
> +		printk(KERN_INFO "%s ", argv[i++]);
> +	printk(KERN_INFO  "\n");
> +
>  	sub_info->argv = argv;
>  	sub_info->envp = envp;
>  
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.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 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 17:57:04 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200630175704.GO13911@42.do-not-panic.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200626025410.GJ4332@42.do-not-panic.com>

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 02:54:10AM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 08:37:55PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 24.06.20 20:32, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > [...]> 
> > > So the translations look correct. But your change is actually a sematic change
> > > if(ret) will only trigger if there is an error
> > > if (KWIFEXITED(ret)) will always trigger when the process ends. So we will always overwrite -ECHILD
> > > and we did not do it before. 
> > > 
> > 
> > So the right fix is
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
> > index f81e8698e36e..a3a3196e84d1 100644
> > --- a/kernel/umh.c
> > +++ b/kernel/umh.c
> > @@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ static void call_usermodehelper_exec_sync(struct subprocess_info *sub_info)
> >                  * the real error code is already in sub_info->retval or
> >                  * sub_info->retval is 0 anyway, so don't mess with it then.
> >                  */
> > -               if (KWIFEXITED(ret))
> > +               if (KWEXITSTATUS(ret))
> >                         sub_info->retval = KWEXITSTATUS(ret);
> >         }
> >  
> > I think.
> 
> Nope, the right form is to check for WIFEXITED() before using WEXITSTATUS().
> I'm not able to reproduce this on x86 with a bridge. What type of bridge
> are you using on a guest, or did you mean using KVM so that the *host*
> can spawn kvm guests?
> 
> It would be good if you can try to add a bridge manually and see where
> things fail. Can you do something like this:
> 
> brctl addbr br0
> brctl addif br0 ens6 
> ip link set dev br0 up
> 
> Note that most callers are for modprobe. I'd be curious to see which
> umh is failing which breaks bridge for you. Can you trut this so we can
> see which umh call is failing?

Christian, any luck getting to test the code below to see what this
reveals?

  Luis

> 
> diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
> index f81e8698e36e..5ad74bc301d8 100644
> --- a/kernel/umh.c
> +++ b/kernel/umh.c
> @@ -2,6 +2,9 @@
>  /*
>   * umh - the kernel usermode helper
>   */
> +
> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
> +
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  #include <linux/sched/task.h>
> @@ -154,8 +157,12 @@ static void call_usermodehelper_exec_sync(struct subprocess_info *sub_info)
>  		 * the real error code is already in sub_info->retval or
>  		 * sub_info->retval is 0 anyway, so don't mess with it then.
>  		 */
> -		if (KWIFEXITED(ret))
> +		printk("== ret: %02x\n", ret);
> +		printk("== KWIFEXITED(ret): %02x\n", KWIFEXITED(ret));
> +		if (KWIFEXITED(ret)) {
> +			printk("KWEXITSTATUS(ret): %d\n", KWEXITSTATUS(ret));
>  			sub_info->retval = KWEXITSTATUS(ret);
> +		}
>  	}
>  
>  	/* Restore default kernel sig handler */
> @@ -383,6 +390,7 @@ struct subprocess_info *call_usermodehelper_setup(const char *path, char **argv,
>  		void *data)
>  {
>  	struct subprocess_info *sub_info;
> +	unsigned int i = 0;
>  	sub_info = kzalloc(sizeof(struct subprocess_info), gfp_mask);
>  	if (!sub_info)
>  		goto out;
> @@ -394,6 +402,11 @@ struct subprocess_info *call_usermodehelper_setup(const char *path, char **argv,
>  #else
>  	sub_info->path = path;
>  #endif
> +	pr_info("sub_info->path: %s\n", sub_info->path);
> +	while (argv[i])
> +		printk(KERN_INFO "%s ", argv[i++]);
> +	printk(KERN_INFO  "\n");
> +
>  	sub_info->argv = argv;
>  	sub_info->envp = envp;
>  
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: ast@kernel.org, jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com,
	philipp.reisner@linbit.com, bfields@fieldses.org,
	keyrings@vger.kernel.org, christian.brauner@ubuntu.com,
	yangtiezhu@loongson.cn, linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, jmorris@namei.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.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, dhowells@redhat.com,
	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
Subject: Re: [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 17:57:08 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200630175704.GO13911@42.do-not-panic.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200626025410.GJ4332@42.do-not-panic.com>

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 02:54:10AM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 08:37:55PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 24.06.20 20:32, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > [...]> 
> > > So the translations look correct. But your change is actually a sematic change
> > > if(ret) will only trigger if there is an error
> > > if (KWIFEXITED(ret)) will always trigger when the process ends. So we will always overwrite -ECHILD
> > > and we did not do it before. 
> > > 
> > 
> > So the right fix is
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
> > index f81e8698e36e..a3a3196e84d1 100644
> > --- a/kernel/umh.c
> > +++ b/kernel/umh.c
> > @@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ static void call_usermodehelper_exec_sync(struct subprocess_info *sub_info)
> >                  * the real error code is already in sub_info->retval or
> >                  * sub_info->retval is 0 anyway, so don't mess with it then.
> >                  */
> > -               if (KWIFEXITED(ret))
> > +               if (KWEXITSTATUS(ret))
> >                         sub_info->retval = KWEXITSTATUS(ret);
> >         }
> >  
> > I think.
> 
> Nope, the right form is to check for WIFEXITED() before using WEXITSTATUS().
> I'm not able to reproduce this on x86 with a bridge. What type of bridge
> are you using on a guest, or did you mean using KVM so that the *host*
> can spawn kvm guests?
> 
> It would be good if you can try to add a bridge manually and see where
> things fail. Can you do something like this:
> 
> brctl addbr br0
> brctl addif br0 ens6 
> ip link set dev br0 up
> 
> Note that most callers are for modprobe. I'd be curious to see which
> umh is failing which breaks bridge for you. Can you trut this so we can
> see which umh call is failing?

Christian, any luck getting to test the code below to see what this
reveals?

  Luis

> 
> diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
> index f81e8698e36e..5ad74bc301d8 100644
> --- a/kernel/umh.c
> +++ b/kernel/umh.c
> @@ -2,6 +2,9 @@
>  /*
>   * umh - the kernel usermode helper
>   */
> +
> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
> +
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  #include <linux/sched/task.h>
> @@ -154,8 +157,12 @@ static void call_usermodehelper_exec_sync(struct subprocess_info *sub_info)
>  		 * the real error code is already in sub_info->retval or
>  		 * sub_info->retval is 0 anyway, so don't mess with it then.
>  		 */
> -		if (KWIFEXITED(ret))
> +		printk("== ret: %02x\n", ret);
> +		printk("== KWIFEXITED(ret): %02x\n", KWIFEXITED(ret));
> +		if (KWIFEXITED(ret)) {
> +			printk("KWEXITSTATUS(ret): %d\n", KWEXITSTATUS(ret));
>  			sub_info->retval = KWEXITSTATUS(ret);
> +		}
>  	}
>  
>  	/* Restore default kernel sig handler */
> @@ -383,6 +390,7 @@ struct subprocess_info *call_usermodehelper_setup(const char *path, char **argv,
>  		void *data)
>  {
>  	struct subprocess_info *sub_info;
> +	unsigned int i = 0;
>  	sub_info = kzalloc(sizeof(struct subprocess_info), gfp_mask);
>  	if (!sub_info)
>  		goto out;
> @@ -394,6 +402,11 @@ struct subprocess_info *call_usermodehelper_setup(const char *path, char **argv,
>  #else
>  	sub_info->path = path;
>  #endif
> +	pr_info("sub_info->path: %s\n", sub_info->path);
> +	while (argv[i])
> +		printk(KERN_INFO "%s ", argv[i++]);
> +	printk(KERN_INFO  "\n");
> +
>  	sub_info->argv = argv;
>  	sub_info->envp = envp;
>  
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-06-30 17:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 124+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-10 15:49 [PATCH 0/5] kmod/umh: a few fixes Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [Bridge] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [PATCH 1/5] selftests: kmod: Use variable NAME in kmod_test_0001() Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49   ` [Bridge] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [PATCH 2/5] kmod: Remove redundant "be an" in the comment Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49   ` [Bridge] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [PATCH 3/5] test_kmod: Avoid potential double free in trigger_config_run_type() Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49   ` [Bridge] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [PATCH 4/5] umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49   ` [Bridge] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49   ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-23 14:11   ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-23 14:12     ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-23 14:11     ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-23 14:23     ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-23 15:09       ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-23 14:23       ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 11:11       ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 11:12         ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 11:11         ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 12:05         ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 12:05           ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 12:05           ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 13:17           ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 13:17             ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 13:17             ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 16:13             ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 16:13               ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 16:13               ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 14:43         ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-24 14:43           ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-24 14:43           ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-24 15:54           ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 15:56             ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 15:54             ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 16:09             ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 16:09               ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 16:09               ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 17:58               ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 17:59                 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 17:58                 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:09                 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:10                   ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:09                   ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:32                   ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:32                     ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:32                     ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:37                     ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:38                       ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:37                       ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-25 13:26                       ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-25 13:27                         ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-25 13:26                         ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-26  2:54                       ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26  2:54                         ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26  2:54                         ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26  5:22                         ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-26  5:24                           ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-26  5:22                           ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-26  9:00                           ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-26  9:00                             ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-26  9:00                             ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-26 11:40                             ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 11:40                               ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 11:40                               ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 11:50                               ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 11:50                                 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 11:50                                 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-30 17:57                         ` Luis Chamberlain [this message]
2020-06-30 17:57                           ` [Bridge] " Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-30 17:57                           ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 10:08                           ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 10:08                             ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 10:08                             ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 13:24                             ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-01 13:24                               ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-01 13:24                               ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-01 13:53                               ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 13:53                                 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 13:53                                 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 14:08                                 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-01 14:08                                   ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-01 14:08                                   ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-01 15:38                                   ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 15:39                                     ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 15:38                                     ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 15:48                                     ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 15:49                                       ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 15:48                                       ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 15:58                                       ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 15:58                                         ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 15:58                                         ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 16:01                                         ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 16:03                                           ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 16:01                                           ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-02  4:26                                     ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-02  4:26                                       ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-02  4:26                                       ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-02 19:46                                       ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-02 19:47                                         ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-02 19:46                                         ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-03  0:52                                         ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-03  0:52                                           ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-03  0:52                                           ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-03 13:28                                           ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-03 13:28                                             ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-03 13:28                                             ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 15:26                                 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 15:27                                   ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 15:26                                   ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 13:46                             ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 13:46                               ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 13:46                               ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [PATCH 5/5] selftests: simplify kmod failure value Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49   ` [Bridge] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49   ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-18  0:43 ` [PATCH 0/5] kmod/umh: a few fixes Andrew Morton
2020-06-18  0:43   ` [Bridge] " Andrew Morton
2020-06-18  0:43   ` Andrew Morton
2020-06-19 20:46   ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-19 20:46     ` [Bridge] " Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-19 20:46     ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-19 21:07     ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-19 21:07       ` [Bridge] " Luis Chamberlain

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200630175704.GO13911@42.do-not-panic.com \
    --to=mcgrof@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chainsaw@gentoo.org \
    --cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
    --cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=lars.ellenberg@linbit.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=markward@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com \
    --cc=philipp.reisner@linbit.com \
    --cc=ravenexp@gmail.com \
    --cc=roopa@cumulusnetworks.com \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=slyfox@gentoo.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=yangtiezhu@loongson.cn \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.