Re: [PATCH] ovl: copy new uid/gid into overlayfs runtime inode

On 3/3/16, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Konstantin Khlebnikov > wrote: >> Overlayfs must update uid/gid after chown, otherwise functions >> like inode_owner_or_capable() will check user against stale uid. >> Catched by xfstests generic/087, it chowns file and calls

Re: fs: uninterruptible hang in handle_userfault

On 3/3/16, Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Mar 2, 2016 23:14, "Sedat Dilek" <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Is that commit [1] Linux-4.5 material or affects other versions, too? > > Hmm. I guess this affects anything wi

Re: fs: uninterruptible hang in handle_userfault

On 3/3/16, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mar 2, 2016 23:14, "Sedat Dilek" wrote: >> >> Is that commit [1] Linux-4.5 material or affects other versions, too? > > Hmm. I guess this affects anything with userfaultfd. > OK, Linux v4.4.y LTS has userfaultfd - i

Re: [PATCH] objtool: Disable stack validation when CROSS_COMPILE is used

On 3/2/16, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Josh, > > On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 15:54:51 -0600 Josh Poimboeuf > wrote: >> >> Changing it to use the host compiler would probably be an easy fix, but >> that would expose a harder bug related to endianness. > > Just

Re: [PATCH] objtool: Disable stack validation when CROSS_COMPILE is used

On 3/2/16, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Josh, > > On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 15:54:51 -0600 Josh Poimboeuf > wrote: >> >> Changing it to use the host compiler would probably be an easy fix, but >> that would expose a harder bug related to endianness. > > Just by luck, my PowerPC host is little endian

Re: fs: uninterruptible hang in handle_userfault

On 3/2/16, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Andrea Arcangeli > wrote: >> >> Running page faults that late in the exit path with signal disabled >> was frankly unexpected. > > I agree that it's less than wonderful. > >>

Re: fs: uninterruptible hang in handle_userfault

On 3/2/16, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Andrea Arcangeli > wrote: >> >> Running page faults that late in the exit path with signal disabled >> was frankly unexpected. > > I agree that it's less than wonderful. > >>Apparently it's not just >> PF_EXITING that

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/2/16, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 04:53:36PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote: >>> 8110f570 : >>> 8110f570: 55 push

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On 3/2/16, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 04:53:36PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote: >>> 8110f570 : >>> 8110f570: 55 push %rbp >>> 8110f571: 48 8

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 04:53:36PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> 8110f570 : >> 8110f570:55 push %rbp >> 8110f571:48 89 e5mov%rsp,%rbp &g

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 04:53:36PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> 8110f570 : >> 8110f570:55 push %rbp >> 8110f571:48 89 e5mov%rsp,%rbp >> 8110f574:4

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/2/16, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 3/2/16, Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> wrote: >>> >>> [ Resend with reply all, instead of just "reply" ] >>>

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On 3/2/16, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On 3/2/16, Steven Rostedt wrote: >>> >>> [ Resend with reply all, instead of just "reply" ] >>> >>> On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 16:53:36 +0100 >>> Sedat Dile

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/2/16, Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> wrote: >> >> [ Resend with reply all, instead of just "reply" ] >> >> On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 16:53:36 +0100 >> Sedat Dilek

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On 3/2/16, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> >> [ Resend with reply all, instead of just "reply" ] >> >> On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 16:53:36 +0100 >> Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >>> 8110f3f0 : >>> 8

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 04:00:49PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> > >> > Right, most odd. Sedat, could you provide objdump -D of the relevant >> > sections of vmlinux ? >> > >> >> Can

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 04:00:49PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> > >> > Right, most odd. Sedat, could you provide objdump -D of the relevant >> > sections of vmlinux ? >> > >> >> Can you give some clear ins

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/1/16, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:07:40AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 11:05:42 +0100 >> Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> > [ FACT #3: TEST-CASE #2 ] &g

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/1/16, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:07:40AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 11:05:42 +0100 >> Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >> >> > [ FACT #3: TEST-CASE #2 ] >> > >> > The most reliable test-case is to s

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Jiri Kosina <ji...@kernel.org> wrote: > On Wed, 2 Mar 2016, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >> static bool start_flush_work(struct work_struct *work, struct wq_barrier >> *barr) >> { >> struct worker *worker = NULL; >> struct worker

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Wed, 2 Mar 2016, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >> static bool start_flush_work(struct work_struct *work, struct wq_barrier >> *barr) >> { >> struct worker *worker = NULL; >> struct worker_pool *pool

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/1/16, Alan Stern <st...@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote: >> On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:57 AM, Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> >>> wrote:

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/2/16, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On 3/1/16, Alan Stern wrote: >> On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:57 AM, Steven Rostedt >>> wrote: >>> > On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 12:05:42 +0200 >>> > Sedat Dilek wrote:

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/1/16, Alan Stern <st...@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote: > On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:57 AM, Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> >> wrote: >> > On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 12:05:42 +0200 >> > Sedat Di

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/1/16, Alan Stern wrote: > On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:57 AM, Steven Rostedt >> wrote: >> > On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 12:05:42 +0200 >> > Sedat Dilek wrote: >> > >> >> So, at the beginning..

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/1/16, Alan Stern <st...@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote: > On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:57 AM, Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> >> wrote: >> > On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 12:05:42 +0200 >> > Sedat Di

Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning

On 3/1/16, Alan Stern wrote: > On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:57 AM, Steven Rostedt >> wrote: >> > On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 12:05:42 +0200 >> > Sedat Dilek wrote: >> > >> >> So, at the beginning..

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 8:39 AM, H. Peter Anvin <h...@zytor.com> wrote: > On February 29, 2016 11:28:22 PM PST, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> > wrote: >>On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> wrote: >>> >>> * Stephen Rot

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 8:39 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On February 29, 2016 11:28:22 PM PST, Sedat Dilek > wrote: >>On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> * Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> &g

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) >> failed like this: >> >> DESCEND objtool >> CC

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) >> failed like this: >> >> DESCEND objtool >> CC

Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 24

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20160223: > ... > The aio tree still had a build failure so I used the version from > next-20160111. > Might be good to poke the maintainer as I am seeing this for a long time in

Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 24

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20160223: > ... > The aio tree still had a build failure so I used the version from > next-20160111. > Might be good to poke the maintainer as I am seeing this for a long time in Linux-next. - Sedat -

Re: Thoughts about introducing OPTIMIZATION_CFLAG

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:33 PM, One Thousand Gnomes wrote: >> As said... I checked only for x86 and acpi only. >> >> For example '-Os' is hardcoded in... >> >> arch/x86/Makefile >> arch/x86/purgatory/Makefile >> >> drivers/acpi/Makefile >> drivers/acpi/acpica/Makefile >> >> For acpi part we have

Re: Thoughts about introducing OPTIMIZATION_CFLAG

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote: > [ Not sure if I have addressed all the correct people and mailing-lists ] > > Hi, > > while still digging into a llvmlinux issue with workqueue I saw that > the wrong optimization compiler-flag was used on x86 architecture an

Thoughts about introducing OPTIMIZATION_CFLAG

s desired from my side. I have attached a patchset on top of my llvmlinux-amd64-fixes-4.4, hope this helps a bit to see what I mean. It is not doing what I desire - still WIP. Thoughts? Thanks in advance. Regards, - Sedat - From ed66e809d779d0ce5db6b71ad48792010bf6aad3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sed

Thoughts about introducing OPTIMIZATION_CFLAG

s desired from my side. I have attached a patchset on top of my llvmlinux-amd64-fixes-4.4, hope this helps a bit to see what I mean. It is not doing what I desire - still WIP. Thoughts? Thanks in advance. Regards, - Sedat - From ed66e809d779d0ce5db6b71ad48792010bf6aad3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From:

Re: Thoughts about introducing OPTIMIZATION_CFLAG

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > [ Not sure if I have addressed all the correct people and mailing-lists ] > > Hi, > > while still digging into a llvmlinux issue with workqueue I saw that > the wrong optimization compi

Re: Thoughts about introducing OPTIMIZATION_CFLAG

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:33 PM, One Thousand Gnomes wrote: >> As said... I checked only for x86 and acpi only. >> >> For example '-Os' is hardcoded in... >> >> arch/x86/Makefile >> arch/x86/purgatory/Makefile >> >> drivers/acpi/Makefile >> drivers/acpi/acpica/Makefile

[PATCH] drm: vblank: Use POSIX date for DRM_INFO output

Signed-off-by: Sedat Dilek --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c index 607f493ae801..682cd4b3ba10 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c @@ -361,7

[PATCH] drm: vblank: Use POSIX date for DRM_INFO output

Signed-off-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c index 607f493ae801..682cd4b3ba10 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c +++ b/drivers/g

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 12

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20151009: > > My fixes tree is empty again. > > The qcom tree gained a conflict against the arm-soc tree. > > I used the h8300 tree from next-20150828 since the current tree has been > rebased onto linux-next

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 12

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20151009: > > My fixes tree is empty again. > > The qcom tree gained a conflict against the arm-soc tree. > > I used the h8300 tree from next-20150828 since the current tree has been >

Re: [PATCH] x86: fix build failure

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 8:59 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Andrey Ryabinin >> wrote: >>> With KMEMCHECK=y, KASAN=n: >>> >>> arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c:673:3: error: imp

Re: [PATCH] x86: fix build failure

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 8:59 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Andrey Ryabinin > wrote: >> With KMEMCHECK=y, KASAN=n: >> >> arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c:673:3: error: implicit declaration of function >> ‘memcpy’ [-Werror=implicit-fun

Re: [PATCH] x86: fix build failure

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 8:59 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> With KMEMC

Re: [PATCH] x86: fix build failure

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 8:59 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin@gmail.com> > wrote: >> With KMEMCHECK=y, KASAN=n: >> >> arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c:673:3: error: implicit declarati

Re: [PATCH] x86: fix build failure

Linux v4.3-rcN. The subject-line is not very meaningful - to me at least ? - Sedat - > Reported-by: Ingo Molnar > Reported-by: Sedat Dilek > Fixes: 769a8089c1fd ("x86, efi, kasan: #undef memset/memcpy/memmove per arch") > Signed-off-by: Andrey Ryabinin > --- > arch

Re: [PATCH] x86: fix build failure

s broke my llvmlinux-patches Linux v4.3-rcN. The subject-line is not very meaningful - to me at least ? - Sedat - > Reported-by: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> > Reported-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> > Fixes: 769a8089c1fd ("x86, efi, kasan: #undef memset/mem

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote: > [ CC only relevant people plus Paul as he took care in another thread ] > > First of all, sorry for flooding anybody or any mailing-list. > > Of course, using LLVM/Clang for the Linux-kernel is still WIP, but > this d

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

[ CC only relevant people plus Paul as he took care in another thread ] First of all, sorry for flooding anybody or any mailing-list. Of course, using LLVM/Clang for the Linux-kernel is still WIP, but this does not mean using a different compiler does not find any bugs... Fascinated somehow of

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> [ 23.874836] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at >> kernel/workqueue.c:2678 >> [ 23.874902] in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 1411, name: acpid >> >

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> wrote: > > * Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> [ 23.874836] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at >> kernel/workqueue.c:2678 >> [ 23.874902] in_atomic(): 0, irq

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > [ CC only relevant people plus Paul as he took care in another thread ] > > First of all, sorry for flooding anybody or any mailing-list. > > Of course, using LLVM/Clang for the Linux-kernel is still

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

[ CC only relevant people plus Paul as he took care in another thread ] First of all, sorry for flooding anybody or any mailing-list. Of course, using LLVM/Clang for the Linux-kernel is still WIP, but this does not mean using a different compiler does not find any bugs... Fascinated somehow of

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 05:55:43PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Paul E. McKenney >> wrote: >> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 09:37:05AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >> On

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: >>> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: >>>> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:49 PM

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: >>> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Paul E. McKenney >>> wrote: >>>> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 09:37:05AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Paul E. McKenney >> wrote: >> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 08:28:39AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >> Hi,

Tracing IRQ-flags

Hi Ingo, Hi Steven, I am still fighting with a llvmlinux problem in the area... workqueue | hid | irq-flags (hardirqs/sofirqs disabled) | whatever?! ...(see [0]). [ 24.705463] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680 [ 24.705576] in_atomic(): 0,

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote: >> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >>> > The sequence looks correct. So I don't really see what call sequence could >>> > lead to callin

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 08:28:39AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> Hi, >> >> as I have observed here some lockdep issues (one could be solved in >> netdev) I wanted to try this patchset. >> >&

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

Hi, as I have observed here some lockdep issues (one could be solved in netdev) I wanted to try this patchset. Unfortunately, you cannot pull from... "These changes are available in the git repository at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git for-mingo for you

Tracing IRQ-flags

Hi Ingo, Hi Steven, I am still fighting with a llvmlinux problem in the area... workqueue | hid | irq-flags (hardirqs/sofirqs disabled) | whatever?! ...(see [0]). [ 24.705463] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680 [ 24.705576] in_atomic(): 0,

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 05:55:43PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Paul E. McKenney >> <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> > On Sun, Sep

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 09:37:05AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Paul E. McKenney >> <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> > On Sun, Sep

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sun, Sep 27, 20

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 08:28:39AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> Hi, >> >> as I have observed here some lockdep issues (one could be solved in >> netdev) I wanted to try this p

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Jiri Kosina <ji...@kernel.org> wrote: >> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >>> > The sequence looks correct. So I don't really see what ca

Re: [GIT PULL rcu/urgent] Fix two more 4.3 regressions

Hi, as I have observed here some lockdep issues (one could be solved in netdev) I wanted to try this patchset. Unfortunately, you cannot pull from... "These changes are available in the git repository at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git for-mingo for you

arch/x86: memcpy() "confusion"

Hi, while still playing with llvmlinux patches against Linux v4.3-rc2+ I wondered about the diverse usage of memcpy() in several string*.[c,h] files below x86 arch. Just FYI: I am here on Ubuntu/precise AMD64. The background is my build breaks again due to commit (see [1])... "x86, efi,

arch/x86: memcpy() "confusion"

Hi, while still playing with llvmlinux patches against Linux v4.3-rc2+ I wondered about the diverse usage of memcpy() in several string*.[c,h] files below x86 arch. Just FYI: I am here on Ubuntu/precise AMD64. The background is my build breaks again due to commit (see [1])... "x86, efi,

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Fri, 25 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> > The sequence looks correct. So I don't really see what call sequence could >> > lead to calling flush_work() from __cancel_work_timer() with IRQs >> > disabl

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Fri, 25 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> >> $ egrep -nr 'save|restore|acquire|release' >> >> objdump-Dr_kernel-workqueue_o_CLANG-3-7.txt | egrep 'irq|map' >> >> 5

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> >> >> > >> [ 24.705767] [] dump_stack+0x7d/0xa0 >> >> >> > >> [ 24.705774] [] ___might_sleep+0x28a/0x2a0 >> >> >&g

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> >> >> > >> [ 24.705767] [] dump_stack+0x7d/0xa0 >> >> >> > >> [ 24.705774] [] ___might_sleep+0x28a/0x2a0 >> >> >&g

Re: [Linux 4.2-rc8+...v4.3-rc2] REGRESSION: ppp: circular locking dependency detected: [pppd] ppp_dev_uninit() | rtnl_lock()

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 8:00 PM, David Miller wrote: >> From: Sedat Dilek >> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 18:19:16 +0200 >> >>> OK, I guess DaveM will take your patch into net.git#master first... >>> and

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> >> > >> [ 24.705767] [] dump_stack+0x7d/0xa0 >> >> > >> [ 24.705774] [] ___might_sleep+0x28a/0x2a0 >> >> > >>

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Jiri Kosina <ji...@kernel.org> wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> >> > >> [ 24.705767] [] dump_stack+0x7d/0xa0 >> >> > >> [ 24.705774] [] ___might_sleep+0x28a/0x2a0

Re: [Linux 4.2-rc8+...v4.3-rc2] REGRESSION: ppp: circular locking dependency detected: [pppd] ppp_dev_uninit() | rtnl_lock()

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 8:00 PM, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: >> From: Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> >> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 18:19:16 +0200 >> >>> OK,

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Jiri Kosina <ji...@kernel.org> wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> >> >> > >> [ 24.705767] [] dump_stack+0x7d/0xa0 >> >> >> > >> [ 24.705774] [] ___might_sleep+0x

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Jiri Kosina <ji...@kernel.org> wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> >> >> > >> [ 24.705767] [] dump_stack+0x7d/0xa0 >> >> >> > >> [ 24.705774] [] ___might_sleep+0x

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Jiri Kosina <ji...@kernel.org> wrote: > On Fri, 25 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> >> $ egrep -nr 'save|restore|acquire|release' >> >> objdump-Dr_kernel-workqueue_o_CLANG-3-7.txt | egrep 'irq|map' >> >

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Jiri Kosina <ji...@kernel.org> wrote: > On Fri, 25 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> > The sequence looks correct. So I don't really see what call sequence could >> > lead to calling flush_work() from __cancel_work_timer() with IRQ

Re: [Linux 4.2-rc8+...v4.3-rc2] REGRESSION: ppp: circular locking dependency detected: [pppd] ppp_dev_uninit() | rtnl_lock()

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 8:00 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Sedat Dilek > Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 18:19:16 +0200 > >> OK, I guess DaveM will take your patch into net.git#master first... >> and tag it there with CC-stable? > > I do not tag anything with stable. > &g

Re: [regression] Re: Linux 4.3-rc1

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:48 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: >>> On 09/23/2015 02:56 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >>>> Another regression for Jairo to track. >

Re: [Linux 4.2-rc8+...v4.3-rc2] REGRESSION: ppp: circular locking dependency detected: [pppd] ppp_dev_uninit() | rtnl_lock()

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Guillaume Nault wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 11:21:50PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:46 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Guillaume Nault >> > wrote: >> > Do you mind

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2015, Jiri Kosina wrote: > >> > >> [ 24.705767] [] dump_stack+0x7d/0xa0 >> > >> [ 24.705774] [] ___might_sleep+0x28a/0x2a0 >> > >> [ 24.705779] [] __might_sleep+0x4f/0xc0 >> > >> [ 24.705784] []

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> I am seeing this call-trace when compiling a Linux v4.2.y or Linux >> v4.3-rcN kernel with my llvm-toolchain and llvmlinux-amd64 patchset. >> CLANG sometimes catch

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2015, Jiri Kosina wrote: > >> > >> [ 24.705767] [] dump_stack+0x7d/0xa0 >> > >> [ 24.705774] [] ___might_sleep+0x28a/0x2a0 >> > >> [ 24.705779] [] __might_sleep+0x4f/0xc0 >> > >> [ 24.705784] []

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Jiri Kosina <ji...@kernel.org> wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2015, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >> I am seeing this call-trace when compiling a Linux v4.2.y or Linux >> v4.3-rcN kernel with my llvm-toolchain and llvmlinux-amd64 patchset. >> CLANG

Re: [Linux 4.2-rc8+...v4.3-rc2] REGRESSION: ppp: circular locking dependency detected: [pppd] ppp_dev_uninit() | rtnl_lock()

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Guillaume Nault <g.na...@alphalink.fr> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 11:21:50PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:46 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Guillau

Re: [regression] Re: Linux 4.3-rc1

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:48 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Shuah Khan <shua...@osg.samsung.com> wrote: >>> On 09/23/2015 02:56 A

Re: [Linux 4.2-rc8+...v4.3-rc2] REGRESSION: ppp: circular locking dependency detected: [pppd] ppp_dev_uninit() | rtnl_lock()

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 8:00 PM, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > From: Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> > Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 18:19:16 +0200 > >> OK, I guess DaveM will take your patch into net.git#master first... >> and tag it there with CC-

Re: [Linux v4.2] workqueue: llvmlinux: acpid: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/workqueue.c:2680

run+0x6c/0xe0 [ 23.444383] [] prepare_exit_to_usermode+0x13a/0x140 [ 23.444386] [] syscall_return_slowpath+0x281/0x2f0 [ 23.444389] [] ? filp_close+0x65/0x90 [ 23.444392] [] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x17/0x19 [ 23.444396] [] int_ret_from_sys_call+0x25/0x9f Can you look at this?

Re: [regression] Re: [Linux-v4.2-10463-g9a9952bbd76a] i915: WARNING: intel_display.c:1377 assert_planes_disabled

- [1] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm-intel/commit/?h=drm-intel-fixes=721a09f7393de6c28a07516dccd654c6e995944a > -Daniel > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 08:23:04AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 4:42 AM,

Re: [regression] Re: Linux 4.3-rc1

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:48 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 09/23/2015 02:56 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >>> Another regression for Jairo to track. >>> -Daniel >> >> Saw the same problem in 4.3-rc2 as

Re: [Linux 4.2-rc8+...v4.3-rc2] REGRESSION: ppp: circular locking dependency detected: [pppd] ppp_dev_uninit() | rtnl_lock()

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:46 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Guillaume Nault > wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 08:06:16AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >>> Without reverting the below culprit ppp patch... >>> >>> commit/?id=8

Re: [Linux 4.2-rc8+...v4.3-rc2] REGRESSION: ppp: circular locking dependency detected: [pppd] ppp_dev_uninit() | rtnl_lock()

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Guillaume Nault wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 08:06:16AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> Without reverting the below culprit ppp patch... >> >> commit/?id=8cb775bc0a34dc596837e7da03fd22c747be618b >> ("ppp: fix device un

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >