lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Mar]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: [RESEND PATCH v2] of: fix kmemleak crash caused by imbalance in early memory reservation
    On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 8:12 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> 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 <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
    > > >
    > > > Hi all,
    > > >
    > > > On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:03:09 -0600 Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org> wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 10:47 AM Marc Gonzalez <marc.w.gonzalez@free.fr> 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 <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
    > > > > > > Acked-by: Prateek Patel <prpatel@nvidia.com>
    > > > > > > Tested-by: Marc Gonzalez <marc.w.gonzalez@free.fr>
    > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
    > > > > > > ---
    > > > > > > 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).

    Rob

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2019-03-06 14:40    [W:2.213 / U:0.032 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site