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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable 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 38CBEC43381 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 2019 16:18:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0918820684 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 2019 16:18:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="HtQnQlCm" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727189AbfCFQSR (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Mar 2019 11:18:17 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-f195.google.com ([209.85.215.195]:39331 "EHLO mail-pg1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726900AbfCFQSR (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Mar 2019 11:18:17 -0500 Received: by mail-pg1-f195.google.com with SMTP id h8so8788510pgp.6; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 08:18:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0y6wNEQhnkyDxpUXBHImOgIzY9NqUw6RV4Q+u1AuA7Q=; b=HtQnQlCm/FdkzRSLg3KCqfWUCv/CfbRTk4UsKRNwrGA5WCaH1KIlLFwj38H0LGSgSr XQLy8pZNp/XdRWNzoSiXo0rz8h2kcnuYOTby+nlpDcxdBjPK7WhHAKhLyqvpguK+MmgN LSZF9BJLwVSLC8wKXvPdM2k3eG2nywyZyah7ZHrrOsaPDYYKjGijilseQ6AD1Pm1G8qx D51u3ynhRZM05keopt6SfeK9NZZ/hy9BUHi+sbvv31pLNey17p5NH2pjcQ2a1mZoAWps aG/v3CAADTN41GclPwTY9NVswrOBRRnqkiDQcs05ES4zleaNbzXFOaBVKsbwaBWSrT5n jtnA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0y6wNEQhnkyDxpUXBHImOgIzY9NqUw6RV4Q+u1AuA7Q=; b=tm5sZupPDq3+XNxGLpWbTZOY8bAnKfP1mS1OCvhkdqNbvhAa2gSWfPbwbk21EhhuD2 BYWef738JcrALppPeKSi0D8QPslTTVJf+OsGd2EyaupLsHMopwGc4mtrSDMl85FvaQEl YpUu3IScsoi2ShAASY8wMXKd2eYM7bIQMk72fmBFo/qFiDXh5H8HC04eWo1xHV6b8prQ pTxdSD+7OWTwmPtH2H6pcO3kLwdOp51KDlbh/AA0XgHFjA+/R8yG/11KZXSSOCwCA7mU ZhcQQdyLxzamKizt0n2YFjmf+e494m+SsafCKy2t8+7FMyM3HzHJMk2SlLUi1o6zS1wp +2og== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXSdK/dEjyZaU+qAACsZG77015H1FPoxbZ+SPjWWBcaulDRZMfq 2sE2G5RSiiCTMiG44QNieHU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxyUF4i/ItcUVBn3VVOoNONSIjrNj29dTYkHt2+0iQcg3TRka8j1cxmz6dFbUTs1GmMhQD5ZA== X-Received: by 2002:a63:2224:: with SMTP id i36mr6895284pgi.169.1551889096252; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 08:18:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from server.roeck-us.net ([2600:1700:e321:62f0:329c:23ff:fee3:9d7c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x23sm3033927pgf.10.2019.03.06.08.18.14 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Mar 2019 08:18:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2] of: fix kmemleak crash caused by imbalance in early memory reservation To: Rob Herring Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Marc Gonzalez , Frank Rowand , Mike Rapoport , Marek Szyprowski , Catalin Marinas , Prateek Patel , DT , LKML , stable , Andrew Morton References: <3c886941-bf9d-f040-b568-ee7a8eba9a04@free.fr> <20190123055414.GA4747@rapoport-lnx> <78f4ea8a-996d-038e-9e33-5ff02fa2c43f@samsung.com> <20190123123143.GE4747@rapoport-lnx> <4b8f82c4-7f8f-b814-c1ec-9902e43963f6@free.fr> <617e0d57-342d-4162-bd21-ece18e481d87@free.fr> <20190213085028.6199594b@canb.auug.org.au> <20190306021248.GA17298@roeck-us.net> From: Guenter Roeck Message-ID: <48ccaa25-725d-e72c-391a-5a078e1c7f77@roeck-us.net> Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2019 08:18:13 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On 3/6/19 5:39 AM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 8:12 PM Guenter Roeck wrote: >> >> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 04:12:24PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 3:50 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:03:09 -0600 Rob Herring wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 10:47 AM Marc Gonzalez wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 04/02/2019 15:37, Marc Gonzalez wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 3.15+ >>>>>>> Fixes: 3f0c820664483 ("drivers: of: add initialization code for dynamic reserved memory") >>>>>>> Acked-by: Marek Szyprowski >>>>>>> Acked-by: Prateek Patel >>>>>>> Tested-by: Marc Gonzalez >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> Resend with DT CCed to reach robh's patch queue >>>>>>> I added CC: stable, Fixes, and Prateek's ack >>>>>>> Trim recipients list to minimize inconvenience >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm confused over commit 3532b3b554a216f30edb841d29eef48521bdc592 in linux-next >>>>>> "memblock: drop __memblock_alloc_base()" >>>>>> >>>>>> It's definitely going to conflict with the proposed patch >>>>>> over drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c >>>>>> >>>>>> Rob, what's the next step then? >>>>> >>>>> Rebase it on top of what's in linux-next and apply it to the tree >>>>> which has the above dependency. I'm guessing that is Andrew Morton's >>>>> tree. >>>> >>>> Yeah, that is in Andrew's "post linux-next" patch series, so if you >>>> rebase it on top of linux-next and then send it to Andrew with some >>>> explanation. >>>> >>>> ... >>>> >>>> Actually, if it is intended for the stable trees, then presumably it is >>>> intended to go to Linus for the current release? In which case, the >>>> patch in Andrew's tree will have to be changed to cope after your patch >>>> appears in Linus' tree (and therefore, linux-next). >>> >>> At this point in the cycle, I wasn't planning to send this for 5.0. >>> It's not fixing something introduced in 5.0 and it is a debug feature. >>> >> Hi Rob, >> >> this may be a debug feature, but we do test our kernels with it enabled, >> and the problem does affect our 4.19 branch (chromeos-4.19). Are you >> suggesting that we should backport the fix into our branch and not send >> the backport to -stable ? > > No, not at all. Just that I wasn't going to add it to the probable > last 5.0-rc and would wait. > > However, it's complicated by other memblock changes in 5.1 and not a > trivial backport. One of the versions on the list should be easier to > backport than what's in mainline (or going to be). > We went ahead and applied a backport of an older version of the patch series to chromeos-4.19. We'll see how well that works, but so far it looks like it fixes our problem. Guenter