linux-next: manual merge of the sysctl tree with Linus' tree

linux-next: manual merge of the sysctl tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2556 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the sysctl tree got conflicts in:

  include/linux/perf_event.h
  kernel/events/core.c

between commit:

  e6814ec3ba19 ("perf/core: Rename perf_proc_update_handler() -> perf_event_max_sample_rate_handler(), for readability")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  c8be9e66ca1e ("sysctl: treewide: constify the ctl_table argument of handlers")

from the sysctl tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc include/linux/perf_event.h
index d2a15c0c6f8a,84f8f441d011..000000000000
--- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
+++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
@@@ -1598,11 -1573,11 +1598,11 @@@ extern int sysctl_perf_cpu_time_max_per
  
  extern void perf_sample_event_took(u64 sample_len_ns);
  
- int perf_event_max_sample_rate_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write,
 -int perf_proc_update_handler(const struct ctl_table *table, int write,
++int perf_event_max_sample_rate_handler(const struct ctl_table *table, int write,
  		void *buffer, size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos);
- int perf_cpu_time_max_percent_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write,
+ int perf_cpu_time_max_percent_handler(const struct ctl_table *table, int write,
  		void *buffer, size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos);
- int perf_event_max_stack_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write,
+ int perf_event_max_stack_handler(const struct ctl_table *table, int write,
  		void *buffer, size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos);
  
  /* Access to perf_event_open(2) syscall. */
diff --cc kernel/events/core.c
index 41b4d2278c94,26383e3582c6..000000000000
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@@ -450,8 -449,8 +450,8 @@@ static void update_perf_cpu_limits(void
  
  static bool perf_rotate_context(struct perf_cpu_pmu_context *cpc);
  
- int perf_event_max_sample_rate_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write,
 -int perf_proc_update_handler(const struct ctl_table *table, int write,
 -		void *buffer, size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos)
++int perf_event_max_sample_rate_handler(const struct ctl_table *table, int write,
 +				       void *buffer, size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos)
  {
  	int ret;
  	int perf_cpu = sysctl_perf_cpu_time_max_percent;

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sysctl tree with Linus' tree

[Jiaqi Yan]

On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 10:41 PM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 01:22:27PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > On Tue, 21 Mar 2023 13:20:52 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the sysctl tree got a conflict in:
> > >
> > >   mm/memory-failure.c
> > >
> > > between commit:
> > >
> > >   44b8f8bf2438 ("mm: memory-failure: add memory failure stats to sysfs")
> > >
> > > from Linus' tree and commit:
> > >
> > >   cfe7e6ea5ee2 ("mm: memory-failure: Move memory failure sysctls to its own file")
> > >
> > > from the sysctl tree.
> > >
> > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> > > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> > > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> > > is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> > > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> > > complex conflicts.
> >
> > Sorry, I forgot the resolution - see below.

Thanks for resolving the conflicts, Stephen. It also looks good to me.

>
> Oh sorry, its on Linus' tree, so I can just rebase too. Did that and
> addressed the conflict as you did, thanks!
>
>   Luis

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sysctl tree with Linus' tree

[Luis Chamberlain]

On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 01:22:27PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Tue, 21 Mar 2023 13:20:52 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the sysctl tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   mm/memory-failure.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   44b8f8bf2438 ("mm: memory-failure: add memory failure stats to sysfs")
> > 
> > from Linus' tree and commit:
> > 
> >   cfe7e6ea5ee2 ("mm: memory-failure: Move memory failure sysctls to its own file")
> > 
> > from the sysctl tree.
> > 
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> > is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> > complex conflicts.
> 
> Sorry, I forgot the resolution - see below.

Oh sorry, its on Linus' tree, so I can just rebase too. Did that and
addressed the conflict as you did, thanks!

  Luis

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sysctl tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3123 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Tue, 21 Mar 2023 13:20:52 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the sysctl tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   mm/memory-failure.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   44b8f8bf2438 ("mm: memory-failure: add memory failure stats to sysfs")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 
>   cfe7e6ea5ee2 ("mm: memory-failure: Move memory failure sysctls to its own file")
> 
> from the sysctl tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.

Sorry, I forgot the resolution - see below.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc mm/memory-failure.c
index f761704d27d7,242b6cae0035..000000000000
--- a/mm/memory-failure.c
+++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
@@@ -87,41 -88,36 +88,71 @@@ inline void num_poisoned_pages_sub(unsi
  		memblk_nr_poison_sub(pfn, i);
  }
  
 +/**
 + * MF_ATTR_RO - Create sysfs entry for each memory failure statistics.
 + * @_name: name of the file in the per NUMA sysfs directory.
 + */
 +#define MF_ATTR_RO(_name)					\
 +static ssize_t _name##_show(struct device *dev,			\
 +			    struct device_attribute *attr,	\
 +			    char *buf)				\
 +{								\
 +	struct memory_failure_stats *mf_stats =			\
 +		&NODE_DATA(dev->id)->mf_stats;			\
 +	return sprintf(buf, "%lu\n", mf_stats->_name);		\
 +}								\
 +static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(_name)
 +
 +MF_ATTR_RO(total);
 +MF_ATTR_RO(ignored);
 +MF_ATTR_RO(failed);
 +MF_ATTR_RO(delayed);
 +MF_ATTR_RO(recovered);
 +
 +static struct attribute *memory_failure_attr[] = {
 +	&dev_attr_total.attr,
 +	&dev_attr_ignored.attr,
 +	&dev_attr_failed.attr,
 +	&dev_attr_delayed.attr,
 +	&dev_attr_recovered.attr,
 +	NULL,
 +};
 +
 +const struct attribute_group memory_failure_attr_group = {
 +	.name = "memory_failure",
 +	.attrs = memory_failure_attr,
 +};
 +
+ #ifdef CONFIG_SYSCTL
+ static struct ctl_table memory_failure_table[] = {
+ 	{
+ 		.procname	= "memory_failure_early_kill",
+ 		.data		= &sysctl_memory_failure_early_kill,
+ 		.maxlen		= sizeof(sysctl_memory_failure_early_kill),
+ 		.mode		= 0644,
+ 		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec_minmax,
+ 		.extra1		= SYSCTL_ZERO,
+ 		.extra2		= SYSCTL_ONE,
+ 	},
+ 	{
+ 		.procname	= "memory_failure_recovery",
+ 		.data		= &sysctl_memory_failure_recovery,
+ 		.maxlen		= sizeof(sysctl_memory_failure_recovery),
+ 		.mode		= 0644,
+ 		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec_minmax,
+ 		.extra1		= SYSCTL_ZERO,
+ 		.extra2		= SYSCTL_ONE,
+ 	},
+ };
+ 
+ static int __init memory_failure_sysctl_init(void)
+ {
+ 	register_sysctl_init("vm", memory_failure_table);
+ 	return 0;
+ }
+ late_initcall(memory_failure_sysctl_init);
+ #endif /* CONFIG_SYSCTL */
+ 
  /*
   * Return values:
   *   1:   the page is dissolved (if needed) and taken off from buddy,

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the sysctl tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 753 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the sysctl tree got a conflict in:

  mm/memory-failure.c

between commit:

  44b8f8bf2438 ("mm: memory-failure: add memory failure stats to sysfs")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  cfe7e6ea5ee2 ("mm: memory-failure: Move memory failure sysctls to its own file")

from the sysctl tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.



-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sysctl tree with Linus' tree

[Eric W. Biederman]

Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> writes:

> Hi Eric,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the sysctl tree got a conflict in
> net/decnet/sysctl_net_decnet.c between commit
> 887e671f324d9898aaedb29a6ece6c853c394067 ("decnet: netdevice refcount
> leak") from Linus' tree and commit
> f8572d8f2a2ba75408b97dc24ef47c83671795d7 ("sysctl net: Remove unused
> binary sysctl code") from the sysctl tree.
>
> The latter removed the code (function dn_def_dev_strategy()) modified by
> the former, so I just used the latter.  I can carry this fix for a while,
> but it can be fixed by merging v2.6.32-rc7 (or just the
> above commit from Linus' tree - which would merge a much smaller number of
> commits) into the sysctl tree. 

Nice.  I had not realized that bug fix had made it into v2.6.32-rc7.
I will look at merging that to remove the conflict.

I looked at cherry-picking the commit earlier when I saw it in the netdev
tree and my experiment failed.  So I think the only resolution that works
in this case is merging it so the whole history is there.

Eric

linux-next: manual merge of the sysctl tree with Linus' tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 767 bytes --]

Hi Eric,

Today's linux-next merge of the sysctl tree got a conflict in
net/decnet/sysctl_net_decnet.c between commit
887e671f324d9898aaedb29a6ece6c853c394067 ("decnet: netdevice refcount
leak") from Linus' tree and commit
f8572d8f2a2ba75408b97dc24ef47c83671795d7 ("sysctl net: Remove unused
binary sysctl code") from the sysctl tree.

The latter removed the code (function dn_def_dev_strategy()) modified by
the former, so I just used the latter.  I can carry this fix for a while,
but it can be fixed by merging v2.6.32-rc7 (or just the
above commit from Linus' tree - which would merge a much smaller number of
commits) into the sysctl tree. 
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]