On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 at 22:32, Greg KH <g...@kroah.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 11:07:14AM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:
> > From: Waiman Long <long...@redhat.com>
> >
> > [Upstream commit 513e1073d52e55b8024b4f238a48de7587c64ccf]
> >
> > Tetsuo Handa had reported he saw an incorrect "downgrading a read lock"
> > warning right after a previous lockdep warning. It is likely that the
> > previous warning turned off lock debugging causing the lockdep to have
> > inconsistency states leading to the lock downgrade warning.
> >
> > Fix that by add a check for debug_locks at the beginning of
> > __lock_downgrade().
> >
> > Reported-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-ker...@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
> > Reported-by: syzbot+53383ae265fb161ef...@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <long...@redhat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <pet...@infradead.org>
> > Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.dea...@arm.com>
> > Link: 
> > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1547093005-26085-1-git-send-email-long...@redhat.com
> > Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.w...@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  kernel/locking/lockdep.c |    3 +++
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> Why isn't this relevant for 4.19.y?  I can't add a patch to 4.14.y and
> then have someone upgrade to 4.19.y and not have the same fix in there,
> that would be a regression.
>
> So can you redo this series also with a 4.19.y set at the same so we
> don't get out of sync?  I've queued up your first patch already as that
> was in 4.19.y (and also needed in 4.9.y).

I understood, will do. Thanks.

-- 
Baolin Wang
Best Regards

Reply via email to