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_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED 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 7E781C32751 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 19:31:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A495208E4 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 19:31:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="vOibndjh" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730929AbfGaTbU (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:31:20 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-f67.google.com ([209.85.210.67]:47058 "EHLO mail-ot1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729092AbfGaTbT (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:31:19 -0400 Received: by mail-ot1-f67.google.com with SMTP id z23so43070906ote.13 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 12:31:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=rS31TGE+Mlwy7Maxt5cv0TA4vXxyACTIm226Er7Yz18=; b=vOibndjhZQkynS4J/8fftBuH9T/2s/u1bVZrKWX86LTDWN++MLOqRy3Ep27/E6GVWU 604TSX1CLsvH+6a7GFfdrcz0bOlElTQnUJyHPDHxB5BaxRZ+Or5Negww2J2ObAexe2fi 3iM0qn+78IhWNMoJcDYY6HRxtIFDKeS2Zm1GUfXDIEf/Md7bDlfxseS5fZURC5fvAZs1 ML/qgtz4s2tidgqbYLMFqk6qfgVncCuyp1caNzW8MQHd+Q6M2mu5/5l2d/s01juOsmmH VZa/fznlq7uCb+9a+N25RlWsrL6UJdyEv4JPpIrFWi327pk39aN4ehcBSWC1JFdArBUj T9Hg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=rS31TGE+Mlwy7Maxt5cv0TA4vXxyACTIm226Er7Yz18=; b=n8Md8vqEA51lQpuaxtfcTD8QTyEiaoQVq0RieubHoOf6mIZaB3M1UuqdPgWUselZpK Cxh25e9qdUyjcuslis2LUby5OiKPFAUhUug8b5G+bNplgX3MEmOELrSKD8Dn2S/mo0Pw 1SvS7kkb1YK+KoaHhLF78NVO+1h4tmXCy8rS51ItSXdEpo1X2Rh/Ys2e2btPBGy5bfCI encunSeZbl0nhnFkk2RM1hfwiQJM6zRXMefi4RYQTqZKTsuUJOymLhqENcNXvO8X3SZ4 +pNFCnZQwaKsvULYEREwuVUck5lCn/Uhxw5Bu2IDJSID8KQDCXf0YDXKqTnv5sSP3dCU xhkQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXR8gBcFRcHiM4+ARNyJcvqjWzhJL1D8MSGAEu3uTE39PosqwBn aYfcSBMUw0zTUrrIDn/nc9JlJl7Izt4tdGEIj0x/qA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxvLS6tHvfy6ibysI39PnAGiA0Vn1TCXbmDTTfULDYAWuHOLzupVb55cRBZPjvI9lxKLzSQW7IbxXyfUA8LS9c= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:470d:: with SMTP id a13mr89782986otf.126.1564601478105; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 12:31:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190729190655.455345569@linuxfoundation.org> <20190729190721.610390670@linuxfoundation.org> <20190731181444.GA821@amd> In-Reply-To: <20190731181444.GA821@amd> From: Dan Williams Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 12:31:07 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 112/113] libnvdimm/bus: Stop holding nvdimm_bus_list_mutex over __nd_ioctl() To: Pavel Machek Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linux Kernel Mailing List , stable , Vishal Verma , Jane Chu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 11:15 AM Pavel Machek wrote: > > On Mon 2019-07-29 21:23:19, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > From: Dan Williams > > > > commit b70d31d054ee3a6fc1034b9d7fc0ae1e481aa018 upstream. > > > > In preparation for fixing a deadlock between wait_for_bus_probe_idle() > > and the nvdimm_bus_list_mutex arrange for __nd_ioctl() without > > nvdimm_bus_list_mutex held. This also unifies the 'dimm' and 'bus' level > > ioctls into a common nd_ioctl() preamble implementation. > > Ok, so this is a preparation patch, not a fix... > > > Marked for -stable as it is a pre-requisite for a follow-on fix. > > ...but follow-on fixes are going to be applied for 5.2 but not > 4.19. So perhaps this one should not be in 4.19, either? I plan to follow up with a backport of the series for 4.19. I have no problem with v4.19 carrying this in the meantime, but if you want to kick it out and wait for the backport, that's fine too.