Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Input: psxpad-spi - Add PlayStation 1/2 joypads via SPI interface Driver #411

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

AZO234
Copy link

@AZO234 AZO234 commented May 7, 2017

PlayStation 1/2 joypads can be connected directly to the SPI interface.

Signed-off-by: Tomohiro Yoshidomi [email protected]
Reviewed-by: Dmitry Torokhov [email protected]
Acked-by: David Herrmann [email protected]

PlayStation 1/2 joypads can be connected directly to the SPI interface.

Signed-off-by: Tomohiro Yoshidomi <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
Acked-by: David Herrmann <[email protected]>
@KernelPRBot
Copy link

Hi @AZO234!

Thanks for your contribution to the Linux kernel!

Linux kernel development happens on mailing lists, rather than on GitHub - this GitHub repository is a read-only mirror that isn't used for accepting contributions. So that your change can become part of Linux, please email it to us as a patch.

Sending patches isn't quite as simple as sending a pull request, but fortunately it is a well documented process.

Here's what to do:

  • Format your contribution according to kernel requirements
  • Decide who to send your contribution to
  • Set up your system to send your contribution as an email
  • Send your contribution and wait for feedback

How do I format my contribution?

The Linux kernel community is notoriously picky about how contributions are formatted and sent. Fortunately, they have documented their expectations.

Firstly, all contributions need to be formatted as patches. A patch is a plain text document showing the change you want to make to the code, and documenting why it is a good idea.

You can create patches with git format-patch.

Secondly, patches need 'commit messages', which is the human-friendly documentation explaining what the change is and why it's necessary.

Thirdly, changes have some technical requirements. There is a Linux kernel coding style, and there are licensing requirements you need to comply with.

Both of these are documented in the Submitting Patches documentation that is part of the kernel.

Note that you will almost certainly have to modify your existing git commits to satisfy these requirements. Don't worry: there are many guides on the internet for doing this.

Who do I send my contribution to?

The Linux kernel is composed of a number of subsystems. These subsystems are maintained by different people, and have different mailing lists where they discuss proposed changes.

If you don't already know what subsystem your change belongs to, the get_maintainer.pl script in the kernel source can help you.

get_maintainer.pl will take the patch or patches you created in the previous step, and tell you who is responsible for them, and what mailing lists are used. You can also take a look at the MAINTAINERS file by hand.

Make sure that your list of recipients includes a mailing list. If you can't find a more specific mailing list, then LKML - the Linux Kernel Mailing List - is the place to send your patches.

It's not usually necessary to subscribe to the mailing list before you send the patches, but if you're interested in kernel development, subscribing to a subsystem mailing list is a good idea. (At this point, you probably don't need to subscribe to LKML - it is a very high traffic list with about a thousand messages per day, which is often not useful for beginners.)

How do I send my contribution?

Use git send-email, which will ensure that your patches are formatted in the standard manner. In order to use git send-email, you'll need to configure git to use your SMTP email server.

For more information about using git send-email, look at the Git documentation or type git help send-email. There are a number of useful guides and tutorials about git send-email that can be found on the internet.

How do I get help if I'm stuck?

Firstly, don't get discouraged! There are an enormous number of resources on the internet, and many kernel developers who would like to see you succeed.

Many issues - especially about how to use certain tools - can be resolved by using your favourite internet search engine.

If you can't find an answer, there are a few places you can turn:

  • Kernel Newbies - this website contains a lot of useful resources for new kernel developers.
  • If you'd like a step-by-step, challenge-based introduction to kernel development, the Eudyptula Challenge would be an excellent start.
  • The kernel documentation - see also the Documentation directory in the kernel tree.

If you get really, really stuck, you could try the owners of this bot, @daxtens and @ajdlinux. Please be aware that we do have full-time jobs, so we are almost certainly the slowest way to get answers!

I sent my patch - now what?

You wait.

You can check that your email has been received by checking the mailing list archives for the mailing list you sent your patch to. Messages may not be received instantly, so be patient. Kernel developers are generally very busy people, so it may take a few weeks before your patch is looked at.

Then, you keep waiting. Three things may happen:

  • You might get a response to your email. Often these will be comments, which may require you to make changes to your patch, or explain why your way is the best way. You should respond to these comments, and you may need to submit another revision of your patch to address the issues raised.
  • Your patch might be merged into the subsystem tree. Code that becomes part of Linux isn't merged into the main repository straight away - it first goes into the subsystem tree, which is managed by the subsystem maintainer. It is then batched up with a number of other changes sent to Linus for inclusion. (This process is described in some detail in the kernel development process guide).
  • Your patch might be ignored completely. This happens sometimes - don't take it personally. Here's what to do:
    • Wait a bit more - patches often take several weeks to get a response; more if they were sent at a busy time.
    • Kernel developers often silently ignore patches that break the rules. Check for obvious violations of the the Submitting Patches guidelines, the style guidelines, and any other documentation you can find about your subsystem. Check that you're sending your patch to the right place.
    • Try again later. When you resend it, don't add angry commentary, as that will get your patch ignored. It might also get you silently blacklisted.

Further information

Happy hacking!

This message was posted by a bot - if you have any questions or suggestions, please talk to my owners, @ajdlinux and @daxtens, or raise an issue at https:/ajdlinux/KernelPRBot.

@AZO234 AZO234 closed this May 7, 2017
@daxtens
Copy link
Contributor

daxtens commented May 8, 2017 via email

@ajdlinux
Copy link
Contributor

ajdlinux commented May 9, 2017

@daxtens looks like there's already some effort to upstream it - https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9705979/

kdave pushed a commit to kdave/btrfs-devel that referenced this pull request Oct 17, 2018
We're getting a lockdep splat because we take the dio_sem under the
log_mutex.  What we really need is to protect fsync() from logging an
extent map for an extent we never waited on higher up, so just guard the
whole thing with dio_sem.

======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
4.18.0-rc4-xfstests-00025-g5de5edbaf1d4 torvalds#411 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
aio-dio-invalid/30928 is trying to acquire lock:
0000000092621cfd (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}, at: get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0

but task is already holding lock:
00000000cefe6b35 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}, at: btrfs_direct_IO+0x3be/0x400

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #5 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       down_write+0x51/0xb0
       btrfs_log_changed_extents+0x80/0xa40
       btrfs_log_inode+0xbaf/0x1000
       btrfs_log_inode_parent+0x26f/0xa80
       btrfs_log_dentry_safe+0x50/0x70
       btrfs_sync_file+0x357/0x540
       do_fsync+0x38/0x60
       __ia32_sys_fdatasync+0x12/0x20
       do_fast_syscall_32+0x9a/0x2f0
       entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x84/0x96

-> #4 (&ei->log_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __mutex_lock+0x86/0xa10
       btrfs_record_unlink_dir+0x2a/0xa0
       btrfs_unlink+0x5a/0xc0
       vfs_unlink+0xb1/0x1a0
       do_unlinkat+0x264/0x2b0
       do_fast_syscall_32+0x9a/0x2f0
       entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x84/0x96

-> #3 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __sb_start_write+0x14d/0x230
       start_transaction+0x3e6/0x590
       btrfs_evict_inode+0x475/0x640
       evict+0xbf/0x1b0
       btrfs_run_delayed_iputs+0x6c/0x90
       cleaner_kthread+0x124/0x1a0
       kthread+0x106/0x140
       ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50

-> #2 (&fs_info->cleaner_delayed_iput_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __mutex_lock+0x86/0xa10
       btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand+0x197/0x530
       btrfs_check_data_free_space+0x4c/0x90
       btrfs_delalloc_reserve_space+0x20/0x60
       btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x87/0x520
       do_page_mkwrite+0x31/0xa0
       __handle_mm_fault+0x799/0xb00
       handle_mm_fault+0x7c/0xe0
       __do_page_fault+0x1d3/0x4a0
       async_page_fault+0x1e/0x30

-> #1 (sb_pagefaults){.+.+}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __sb_start_write+0x14d/0x230
       btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x6a/0x520
       do_page_mkwrite+0x31/0xa0
       __handle_mm_fault+0x799/0xb00
       handle_mm_fault+0x7c/0xe0
       __do_page_fault+0x1d3/0x4a0
       async_page_fault+0x1e/0x30

-> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}:
       __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       down_read+0x48/0xb0
       get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
       get_user_pages_fast+0xa4/0x150
       iov_iter_get_pages+0xc3/0x340
       do_direct_IO+0xf93/0x1d70
       __blockdev_direct_IO+0x32d/0x1c20
       btrfs_direct_IO+0x227/0x400
       generic_file_direct_write+0xcf/0x180
       btrfs_file_write_iter+0x308/0x58c
       aio_write+0xf8/0x1d0
       io_submit_one+0x3a9/0x620
       __ia32_compat_sys_io_submit+0xb2/0x270
       do_int80_syscall_32+0x5b/0x1a0
       entry_INT80_compat+0x88/0xa0

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
  &mm->mmap_sem --> &ei->log_mutex --> &ei->dio_sem

 Possible unsafe locking scenario:

       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  lock(&ei->dio_sem);
                               lock(&ei->log_mutex);
                               lock(&ei->dio_sem);
  lock(&mm->mmap_sem);

 *** DEADLOCK ***

1 lock held by aio-dio-invalid/30928:
 #0: 00000000cefe6b35 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}, at: btrfs_direct_IO+0x3be/0x400

stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 PID: 30928 Comm: aio-dio-invalid Not tainted 4.18.0-rc4-xfstests-00025-g5de5edbaf1d4 torvalds#411
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.11.0-2.el7 04/01/2014
Call Trace:
 dump_stack+0x7c/0xbb
 print_circular_bug.isra.37+0x297/0x2a4
 check_prev_add.constprop.45+0x781/0x7a0
 ? __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
 validate_chain.isra.41+0x7f0/0xb00
 __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
 lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
 ? get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 down_read+0x48/0xb0
 ? get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 get_user_pages_fast+0xa4/0x150
 iov_iter_get_pages+0xc3/0x340
 do_direct_IO+0xf93/0x1d70
 ? __alloc_workqueue_key+0x358/0x490
 ? __blockdev_direct_IO+0x14b/0x1c20
 __blockdev_direct_IO+0x32d/0x1c20
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 ? can_nocow_extent+0x490/0x490
 ? kvm_clock_read+0x1f/0x30
 ? can_nocow_extent+0x490/0x490
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 btrfs_direct_IO+0x227/0x400
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 generic_file_direct_write+0xcf/0x180
 btrfs_file_write_iter+0x308/0x58c
 aio_write+0xf8/0x1d0
 ? kvm_clock_read+0x1f/0x30
 ? __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
 io_submit_one+0x3a9/0x620
 ? io_submit_one+0xe5/0x620
 __ia32_compat_sys_io_submit+0xb2/0x270
 do_int80_syscall_32+0x5b/0x1a0
 entry_INT80_compat+0x88/0xa0

CC: [email protected] # 4.14+
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>
kdave pushed a commit to kdave/btrfs-devel that referenced this pull request Oct 19, 2018
We're getting a lockdep splat because we take the dio_sem under the
log_mutex.  What we really need is to protect fsync() from logging an
extent map for an extent we never waited on higher up, so just guard the
whole thing with dio_sem.

======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
4.18.0-rc4-xfstests-00025-g5de5edbaf1d4 torvalds#411 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
aio-dio-invalid/30928 is trying to acquire lock:
0000000092621cfd (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}, at: get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0

but task is already holding lock:
00000000cefe6b35 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}, at: btrfs_direct_IO+0x3be/0x400

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #5 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       down_write+0x51/0xb0
       btrfs_log_changed_extents+0x80/0xa40
       btrfs_log_inode+0xbaf/0x1000
       btrfs_log_inode_parent+0x26f/0xa80
       btrfs_log_dentry_safe+0x50/0x70
       btrfs_sync_file+0x357/0x540
       do_fsync+0x38/0x60
       __ia32_sys_fdatasync+0x12/0x20
       do_fast_syscall_32+0x9a/0x2f0
       entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x84/0x96

-> #4 (&ei->log_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __mutex_lock+0x86/0xa10
       btrfs_record_unlink_dir+0x2a/0xa0
       btrfs_unlink+0x5a/0xc0
       vfs_unlink+0xb1/0x1a0
       do_unlinkat+0x264/0x2b0
       do_fast_syscall_32+0x9a/0x2f0
       entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x84/0x96

-> #3 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __sb_start_write+0x14d/0x230
       start_transaction+0x3e6/0x590
       btrfs_evict_inode+0x475/0x640
       evict+0xbf/0x1b0
       btrfs_run_delayed_iputs+0x6c/0x90
       cleaner_kthread+0x124/0x1a0
       kthread+0x106/0x140
       ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50

-> #2 (&fs_info->cleaner_delayed_iput_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __mutex_lock+0x86/0xa10
       btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand+0x197/0x530
       btrfs_check_data_free_space+0x4c/0x90
       btrfs_delalloc_reserve_space+0x20/0x60
       btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x87/0x520
       do_page_mkwrite+0x31/0xa0
       __handle_mm_fault+0x799/0xb00
       handle_mm_fault+0x7c/0xe0
       __do_page_fault+0x1d3/0x4a0
       async_page_fault+0x1e/0x30

-> #1 (sb_pagefaults){.+.+}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __sb_start_write+0x14d/0x230
       btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x6a/0x520
       do_page_mkwrite+0x31/0xa0
       __handle_mm_fault+0x799/0xb00
       handle_mm_fault+0x7c/0xe0
       __do_page_fault+0x1d3/0x4a0
       async_page_fault+0x1e/0x30

-> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}:
       __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       down_read+0x48/0xb0
       get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
       get_user_pages_fast+0xa4/0x150
       iov_iter_get_pages+0xc3/0x340
       do_direct_IO+0xf93/0x1d70
       __blockdev_direct_IO+0x32d/0x1c20
       btrfs_direct_IO+0x227/0x400
       generic_file_direct_write+0xcf/0x180
       btrfs_file_write_iter+0x308/0x58c
       aio_write+0xf8/0x1d0
       io_submit_one+0x3a9/0x620
       __ia32_compat_sys_io_submit+0xb2/0x270
       do_int80_syscall_32+0x5b/0x1a0
       entry_INT80_compat+0x88/0xa0

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
  &mm->mmap_sem --> &ei->log_mutex --> &ei->dio_sem

 Possible unsafe locking scenario:

       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  lock(&ei->dio_sem);
                               lock(&ei->log_mutex);
                               lock(&ei->dio_sem);
  lock(&mm->mmap_sem);

 *** DEADLOCK ***

1 lock held by aio-dio-invalid/30928:
 #0: 00000000cefe6b35 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}, at: btrfs_direct_IO+0x3be/0x400

stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 PID: 30928 Comm: aio-dio-invalid Not tainted 4.18.0-rc4-xfstests-00025-g5de5edbaf1d4 torvalds#411
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.11.0-2.el7 04/01/2014
Call Trace:
 dump_stack+0x7c/0xbb
 print_circular_bug.isra.37+0x297/0x2a4
 check_prev_add.constprop.45+0x781/0x7a0
 ? __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
 validate_chain.isra.41+0x7f0/0xb00
 __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
 lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
 ? get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 down_read+0x48/0xb0
 ? get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 get_user_pages_fast+0xa4/0x150
 iov_iter_get_pages+0xc3/0x340
 do_direct_IO+0xf93/0x1d70
 ? __alloc_workqueue_key+0x358/0x490
 ? __blockdev_direct_IO+0x14b/0x1c20
 __blockdev_direct_IO+0x32d/0x1c20
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 ? can_nocow_extent+0x490/0x490
 ? kvm_clock_read+0x1f/0x30
 ? can_nocow_extent+0x490/0x490
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 btrfs_direct_IO+0x227/0x400
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 generic_file_direct_write+0xcf/0x180
 btrfs_file_write_iter+0x308/0x58c
 aio_write+0xf8/0x1d0
 ? kvm_clock_read+0x1f/0x30
 ? __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
 io_submit_one+0x3a9/0x620
 ? io_submit_one+0xe5/0x620
 __ia32_compat_sys_io_submit+0xb2/0x270
 do_int80_syscall_32+0x5b/0x1a0
 entry_INT80_compat+0x88/0xa0

CC: [email protected] # 4.14+
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>
frank-w referenced this pull request in frank-w/BPI-Router-Linux Nov 13, 2018
commit c495144 upstream.

We're getting a lockdep splat because we take the dio_sem under the
log_mutex.  What we really need is to protect fsync() from logging an
extent map for an extent we never waited on higher up, so just guard the
whole thing with dio_sem.

======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
4.18.0-rc4-xfstests-00025-g5de5edbaf1d4 #411 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
aio-dio-invalid/30928 is trying to acquire lock:
0000000092621cfd (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}, at: get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0

but task is already holding lock:
00000000cefe6b35 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}, at: btrfs_direct_IO+0x3be/0x400

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #5 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       down_write+0x51/0xb0
       btrfs_log_changed_extents+0x80/0xa40
       btrfs_log_inode+0xbaf/0x1000
       btrfs_log_inode_parent+0x26f/0xa80
       btrfs_log_dentry_safe+0x50/0x70
       btrfs_sync_file+0x357/0x540
       do_fsync+0x38/0x60
       __ia32_sys_fdatasync+0x12/0x20
       do_fast_syscall_32+0x9a/0x2f0
       entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x84/0x96

-> #4 (&ei->log_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __mutex_lock+0x86/0xa10
       btrfs_record_unlink_dir+0x2a/0xa0
       btrfs_unlink+0x5a/0xc0
       vfs_unlink+0xb1/0x1a0
       do_unlinkat+0x264/0x2b0
       do_fast_syscall_32+0x9a/0x2f0
       entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x84/0x96

-> #3 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __sb_start_write+0x14d/0x230
       start_transaction+0x3e6/0x590
       btrfs_evict_inode+0x475/0x640
       evict+0xbf/0x1b0
       btrfs_run_delayed_iputs+0x6c/0x90
       cleaner_kthread+0x124/0x1a0
       kthread+0x106/0x140
       ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50

-> #2 (&fs_info->cleaner_delayed_iput_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __mutex_lock+0x86/0xa10
       btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand+0x197/0x530
       btrfs_check_data_free_space+0x4c/0x90
       btrfs_delalloc_reserve_space+0x20/0x60
       btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x87/0x520
       do_page_mkwrite+0x31/0xa0
       __handle_mm_fault+0x799/0xb00
       handle_mm_fault+0x7c/0xe0
       __do_page_fault+0x1d3/0x4a0
       async_page_fault+0x1e/0x30

-> #1 (sb_pagefaults){.+.+}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __sb_start_write+0x14d/0x230
       btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x6a/0x520
       do_page_mkwrite+0x31/0xa0
       __handle_mm_fault+0x799/0xb00
       handle_mm_fault+0x7c/0xe0
       __do_page_fault+0x1d3/0x4a0
       async_page_fault+0x1e/0x30

-> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}:
       __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       down_read+0x48/0xb0
       get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
       get_user_pages_fast+0xa4/0x150
       iov_iter_get_pages+0xc3/0x340
       do_direct_IO+0xf93/0x1d70
       __blockdev_direct_IO+0x32d/0x1c20
       btrfs_direct_IO+0x227/0x400
       generic_file_direct_write+0xcf/0x180
       btrfs_file_write_iter+0x308/0x58c
       aio_write+0xf8/0x1d0
       io_submit_one+0x3a9/0x620
       __ia32_compat_sys_io_submit+0xb2/0x270
       do_int80_syscall_32+0x5b/0x1a0
       entry_INT80_compat+0x88/0xa0

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
  &mm->mmap_sem --> &ei->log_mutex --> &ei->dio_sem

 Possible unsafe locking scenario:

       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  lock(&ei->dio_sem);
                               lock(&ei->log_mutex);
                               lock(&ei->dio_sem);
  lock(&mm->mmap_sem);

 *** DEADLOCK ***

1 lock held by aio-dio-invalid/30928:
 #0: 00000000cefe6b35 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}, at: btrfs_direct_IO+0x3be/0x400

stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 PID: 30928 Comm: aio-dio-invalid Not tainted 4.18.0-rc4-xfstests-00025-g5de5edbaf1d4 #411
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.11.0-2.el7 04/01/2014
Call Trace:
 dump_stack+0x7c/0xbb
 print_circular_bug.isra.37+0x297/0x2a4
 check_prev_add.constprop.45+0x781/0x7a0
 ? __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
 validate_chain.isra.41+0x7f0/0xb00
 __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
 lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
 ? get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 down_read+0x48/0xb0
 ? get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 get_user_pages_fast+0xa4/0x150
 iov_iter_get_pages+0xc3/0x340
 do_direct_IO+0xf93/0x1d70
 ? __alloc_workqueue_key+0x358/0x490
 ? __blockdev_direct_IO+0x14b/0x1c20
 __blockdev_direct_IO+0x32d/0x1c20
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 ? can_nocow_extent+0x490/0x490
 ? kvm_clock_read+0x1f/0x30
 ? can_nocow_extent+0x490/0x490
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 btrfs_direct_IO+0x227/0x400
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 generic_file_direct_write+0xcf/0x180
 btrfs_file_write_iter+0x308/0x58c
 aio_write+0xf8/0x1d0
 ? kvm_clock_read+0x1f/0x30
 ? __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
 io_submit_one+0x3a9/0x620
 ? io_submit_one+0xe5/0x620
 __ia32_compat_sys_io_submit+0xb2/0x270
 do_int80_syscall_32+0x5b/0x1a0
 entry_INT80_compat+0x88/0xa0

CC: [email protected] # 4.14+
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
frank-w referenced this pull request in frank-w/BPI-Router-Linux Nov 13, 2018
commit c495144 upstream.

We're getting a lockdep splat because we take the dio_sem under the
log_mutex.  What we really need is to protect fsync() from logging an
extent map for an extent we never waited on higher up, so just guard the
whole thing with dio_sem.

======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
4.18.0-rc4-xfstests-00025-g5de5edbaf1d4 #411 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
aio-dio-invalid/30928 is trying to acquire lock:
0000000092621cfd (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}, at: get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0

but task is already holding lock:
00000000cefe6b35 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}, at: btrfs_direct_IO+0x3be/0x400

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #5 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       down_write+0x51/0xb0
       btrfs_log_changed_extents+0x80/0xa40
       btrfs_log_inode+0xbaf/0x1000
       btrfs_log_inode_parent+0x26f/0xa80
       btrfs_log_dentry_safe+0x50/0x70
       btrfs_sync_file+0x357/0x540
       do_fsync+0x38/0x60
       __ia32_sys_fdatasync+0x12/0x20
       do_fast_syscall_32+0x9a/0x2f0
       entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x84/0x96

-> #4 (&ei->log_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __mutex_lock+0x86/0xa10
       btrfs_record_unlink_dir+0x2a/0xa0
       btrfs_unlink+0x5a/0xc0
       vfs_unlink+0xb1/0x1a0
       do_unlinkat+0x264/0x2b0
       do_fast_syscall_32+0x9a/0x2f0
       entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x84/0x96

-> #3 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __sb_start_write+0x14d/0x230
       start_transaction+0x3e6/0x590
       btrfs_evict_inode+0x475/0x640
       evict+0xbf/0x1b0
       btrfs_run_delayed_iputs+0x6c/0x90
       cleaner_kthread+0x124/0x1a0
       kthread+0x106/0x140
       ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50

-> #2 (&fs_info->cleaner_delayed_iput_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __mutex_lock+0x86/0xa10
       btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand+0x197/0x530
       btrfs_check_data_free_space+0x4c/0x90
       btrfs_delalloc_reserve_space+0x20/0x60
       btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x87/0x520
       do_page_mkwrite+0x31/0xa0
       __handle_mm_fault+0x799/0xb00
       handle_mm_fault+0x7c/0xe0
       __do_page_fault+0x1d3/0x4a0
       async_page_fault+0x1e/0x30

-> #1 (sb_pagefaults){.+.+}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __sb_start_write+0x14d/0x230
       btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x6a/0x520
       do_page_mkwrite+0x31/0xa0
       __handle_mm_fault+0x799/0xb00
       handle_mm_fault+0x7c/0xe0
       __do_page_fault+0x1d3/0x4a0
       async_page_fault+0x1e/0x30

-> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}:
       __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       down_read+0x48/0xb0
       get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
       get_user_pages_fast+0xa4/0x150
       iov_iter_get_pages+0xc3/0x340
       do_direct_IO+0xf93/0x1d70
       __blockdev_direct_IO+0x32d/0x1c20
       btrfs_direct_IO+0x227/0x400
       generic_file_direct_write+0xcf/0x180
       btrfs_file_write_iter+0x308/0x58c
       aio_write+0xf8/0x1d0
       io_submit_one+0x3a9/0x620
       __ia32_compat_sys_io_submit+0xb2/0x270
       do_int80_syscall_32+0x5b/0x1a0
       entry_INT80_compat+0x88/0xa0

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
  &mm->mmap_sem --> &ei->log_mutex --> &ei->dio_sem

 Possible unsafe locking scenario:

       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  lock(&ei->dio_sem);
                               lock(&ei->log_mutex);
                               lock(&ei->dio_sem);
  lock(&mm->mmap_sem);

 *** DEADLOCK ***

1 lock held by aio-dio-invalid/30928:
 #0: 00000000cefe6b35 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}, at: btrfs_direct_IO+0x3be/0x400

stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 PID: 30928 Comm: aio-dio-invalid Not tainted 4.18.0-rc4-xfstests-00025-g5de5edbaf1d4 #411
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.11.0-2.el7 04/01/2014
Call Trace:
 dump_stack+0x7c/0xbb
 print_circular_bug.isra.37+0x297/0x2a4
 check_prev_add.constprop.45+0x781/0x7a0
 ? __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
 validate_chain.isra.41+0x7f0/0xb00
 __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
 lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
 ? get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 down_read+0x48/0xb0
 ? get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 get_user_pages_fast+0xa4/0x150
 iov_iter_get_pages+0xc3/0x340
 do_direct_IO+0xf93/0x1d70
 ? __alloc_workqueue_key+0x358/0x490
 ? __blockdev_direct_IO+0x14b/0x1c20
 __blockdev_direct_IO+0x32d/0x1c20
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 ? can_nocow_extent+0x490/0x490
 ? kvm_clock_read+0x1f/0x30
 ? can_nocow_extent+0x490/0x490
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 btrfs_direct_IO+0x227/0x400
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 generic_file_direct_write+0xcf/0x180
 btrfs_file_write_iter+0x308/0x58c
 aio_write+0xf8/0x1d0
 ? kvm_clock_read+0x1f/0x30
 ? __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
 io_submit_one+0x3a9/0x620
 ? io_submit_one+0xe5/0x620
 __ia32_compat_sys_io_submit+0xb2/0x270
 do_int80_syscall_32+0x5b/0x1a0
 entry_INT80_compat+0x88/0xa0

CC: [email protected] # 4.14+
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
frank-w referenced this pull request in frank-w/BPI-Router-Linux Nov 13, 2018
commit c495144 upstream.

We're getting a lockdep splat because we take the dio_sem under the
log_mutex.  What we really need is to protect fsync() from logging an
extent map for an extent we never waited on higher up, so just guard the
whole thing with dio_sem.

======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
4.18.0-rc4-xfstests-00025-g5de5edbaf1d4 #411 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
aio-dio-invalid/30928 is trying to acquire lock:
0000000092621cfd (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}, at: get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0

but task is already holding lock:
00000000cefe6b35 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}, at: btrfs_direct_IO+0x3be/0x400

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #5 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       down_write+0x51/0xb0
       btrfs_log_changed_extents+0x80/0xa40
       btrfs_log_inode+0xbaf/0x1000
       btrfs_log_inode_parent+0x26f/0xa80
       btrfs_log_dentry_safe+0x50/0x70
       btrfs_sync_file+0x357/0x540
       do_fsync+0x38/0x60
       __ia32_sys_fdatasync+0x12/0x20
       do_fast_syscall_32+0x9a/0x2f0
       entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x84/0x96

-> #4 (&ei->log_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __mutex_lock+0x86/0xa10
       btrfs_record_unlink_dir+0x2a/0xa0
       btrfs_unlink+0x5a/0xc0
       vfs_unlink+0xb1/0x1a0
       do_unlinkat+0x264/0x2b0
       do_fast_syscall_32+0x9a/0x2f0
       entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x84/0x96

-> #3 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __sb_start_write+0x14d/0x230
       start_transaction+0x3e6/0x590
       btrfs_evict_inode+0x475/0x640
       evict+0xbf/0x1b0
       btrfs_run_delayed_iputs+0x6c/0x90
       cleaner_kthread+0x124/0x1a0
       kthread+0x106/0x140
       ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50

-> #2 (&fs_info->cleaner_delayed_iput_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __mutex_lock+0x86/0xa10
       btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand+0x197/0x530
       btrfs_check_data_free_space+0x4c/0x90
       btrfs_delalloc_reserve_space+0x20/0x60
       btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x87/0x520
       do_page_mkwrite+0x31/0xa0
       __handle_mm_fault+0x799/0xb00
       handle_mm_fault+0x7c/0xe0
       __do_page_fault+0x1d3/0x4a0
       async_page_fault+0x1e/0x30

-> #1 (sb_pagefaults){.+.+}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __sb_start_write+0x14d/0x230
       btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x6a/0x520
       do_page_mkwrite+0x31/0xa0
       __handle_mm_fault+0x799/0xb00
       handle_mm_fault+0x7c/0xe0
       __do_page_fault+0x1d3/0x4a0
       async_page_fault+0x1e/0x30

-> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}:
       __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       down_read+0x48/0xb0
       get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
       get_user_pages_fast+0xa4/0x150
       iov_iter_get_pages+0xc3/0x340
       do_direct_IO+0xf93/0x1d70
       __blockdev_direct_IO+0x32d/0x1c20
       btrfs_direct_IO+0x227/0x400
       generic_file_direct_write+0xcf/0x180
       btrfs_file_write_iter+0x308/0x58c
       aio_write+0xf8/0x1d0
       io_submit_one+0x3a9/0x620
       __ia32_compat_sys_io_submit+0xb2/0x270
       do_int80_syscall_32+0x5b/0x1a0
       entry_INT80_compat+0x88/0xa0

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
  &mm->mmap_sem --> &ei->log_mutex --> &ei->dio_sem

 Possible unsafe locking scenario:

       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  lock(&ei->dio_sem);
                               lock(&ei->log_mutex);
                               lock(&ei->dio_sem);
  lock(&mm->mmap_sem);

 *** DEADLOCK ***

1 lock held by aio-dio-invalid/30928:
 #0: 00000000cefe6b35 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}, at: btrfs_direct_IO+0x3be/0x400

stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 PID: 30928 Comm: aio-dio-invalid Not tainted 4.18.0-rc4-xfstests-00025-g5de5edbaf1d4 #411
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.11.0-2.el7 04/01/2014
Call Trace:
 dump_stack+0x7c/0xbb
 print_circular_bug.isra.37+0x297/0x2a4
 check_prev_add.constprop.45+0x781/0x7a0
 ? __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
 validate_chain.isra.41+0x7f0/0xb00
 __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
 lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
 ? get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 down_read+0x48/0xb0
 ? get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 get_user_pages_fast+0xa4/0x150
 iov_iter_get_pages+0xc3/0x340
 do_direct_IO+0xf93/0x1d70
 ? __alloc_workqueue_key+0x358/0x490
 ? __blockdev_direct_IO+0x14b/0x1c20
 __blockdev_direct_IO+0x32d/0x1c20
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 ? can_nocow_extent+0x490/0x490
 ? kvm_clock_read+0x1f/0x30
 ? can_nocow_extent+0x490/0x490
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 btrfs_direct_IO+0x227/0x400
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 generic_file_direct_write+0xcf/0x180
 btrfs_file_write_iter+0x308/0x58c
 aio_write+0xf8/0x1d0
 ? kvm_clock_read+0x1f/0x30
 ? __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
 io_submit_one+0x3a9/0x620
 ? io_submit_one+0xe5/0x620
 __ia32_compat_sys_io_submit+0xb2/0x270
 do_int80_syscall_32+0x5b/0x1a0
 entry_INT80_compat+0x88/0xa0

CC: [email protected] # 4.14+
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
Mic92 pushed a commit to Mic92/linux that referenced this pull request Feb 4, 2019
Fixes torvalds#411.

It also fixes .gitignore to specify the renamed file.

Fixes: 6e530cb ("lkl: fix autoconf filename as this will be public
and installed")

Signed-off-by: Hajime Tazaki <[email protected]>
ddstreet pushed a commit to ddstreet/linux that referenced this pull request Feb 5, 2019
BugLink: http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1810820

commit c495144 upstream.

We're getting a lockdep splat because we take the dio_sem under the
log_mutex.  What we really need is to protect fsync() from logging an
extent map for an extent we never waited on higher up, so just guard the
whole thing with dio_sem.

======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
4.18.0-rc4-xfstests-00025-g5de5edbaf1d4 torvalds#411 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
aio-dio-invalid/30928 is trying to acquire lock:
0000000092621cfd (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}, at: get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0

but task is already holding lock:
00000000cefe6b35 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}, at: btrfs_direct_IO+0x3be/0x400

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #5 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       down_write+0x51/0xb0
       btrfs_log_changed_extents+0x80/0xa40
       btrfs_log_inode+0xbaf/0x1000
       btrfs_log_inode_parent+0x26f/0xa80
       btrfs_log_dentry_safe+0x50/0x70
       btrfs_sync_file+0x357/0x540
       do_fsync+0x38/0x60
       __ia32_sys_fdatasync+0x12/0x20
       do_fast_syscall_32+0x9a/0x2f0
       entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x84/0x96

-> #4 (&ei->log_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __mutex_lock+0x86/0xa10
       btrfs_record_unlink_dir+0x2a/0xa0
       btrfs_unlink+0x5a/0xc0
       vfs_unlink+0xb1/0x1a0
       do_unlinkat+0x264/0x2b0
       do_fast_syscall_32+0x9a/0x2f0
       entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x84/0x96

-> #3 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __sb_start_write+0x14d/0x230
       start_transaction+0x3e6/0x590
       btrfs_evict_inode+0x475/0x640
       evict+0xbf/0x1b0
       btrfs_run_delayed_iputs+0x6c/0x90
       cleaner_kthread+0x124/0x1a0
       kthread+0x106/0x140
       ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50

-> #2 (&fs_info->cleaner_delayed_iput_mutex){+.+.}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __mutex_lock+0x86/0xa10
       btrfs_alloc_data_chunk_ondemand+0x197/0x530
       btrfs_check_data_free_space+0x4c/0x90
       btrfs_delalloc_reserve_space+0x20/0x60
       btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x87/0x520
       do_page_mkwrite+0x31/0xa0
       __handle_mm_fault+0x799/0xb00
       handle_mm_fault+0x7c/0xe0
       __do_page_fault+0x1d3/0x4a0
       async_page_fault+0x1e/0x30

-> #1 (sb_pagefaults){.+.+}:
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       __sb_start_write+0x14d/0x230
       btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x6a/0x520
       do_page_mkwrite+0x31/0xa0
       __handle_mm_fault+0x799/0xb00
       handle_mm_fault+0x7c/0xe0
       __do_page_fault+0x1d3/0x4a0
       async_page_fault+0x1e/0x30

-> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++}:
       __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
       lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
       down_read+0x48/0xb0
       get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
       get_user_pages_fast+0xa4/0x150
       iov_iter_get_pages+0xc3/0x340
       do_direct_IO+0xf93/0x1d70
       __blockdev_direct_IO+0x32d/0x1c20
       btrfs_direct_IO+0x227/0x400
       generic_file_direct_write+0xcf/0x180
       btrfs_file_write_iter+0x308/0x58c
       aio_write+0xf8/0x1d0
       io_submit_one+0x3a9/0x620
       __ia32_compat_sys_io_submit+0xb2/0x270
       do_int80_syscall_32+0x5b/0x1a0
       entry_INT80_compat+0x88/0xa0

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
  &mm->mmap_sem --> &ei->log_mutex --> &ei->dio_sem

 Possible unsafe locking scenario:

       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  lock(&ei->dio_sem);
                               lock(&ei->log_mutex);
                               lock(&ei->dio_sem);
  lock(&mm->mmap_sem);

 *** DEADLOCK ***

1 lock held by aio-dio-invalid/30928:
 #0: 00000000cefe6b35 (&ei->dio_sem){++++}, at: btrfs_direct_IO+0x3be/0x400

stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 PID: 30928 Comm: aio-dio-invalid Not tainted 4.18.0-rc4-xfstests-00025-g5de5edbaf1d4 torvalds#411
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.11.0-2.el7 04/01/2014
Call Trace:
 dump_stack+0x7c/0xbb
 print_circular_bug.isra.37+0x297/0x2a4
 check_prev_add.constprop.45+0x781/0x7a0
 ? __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
 validate_chain.isra.41+0x7f0/0xb00
 __lock_acquire+0x42e/0x7a0
 lock_acquire+0xbd/0x220
 ? get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 down_read+0x48/0xb0
 ? get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 get_user_pages_unlocked+0x5a/0x1e0
 get_user_pages_fast+0xa4/0x150
 iov_iter_get_pages+0xc3/0x340
 do_direct_IO+0xf93/0x1d70
 ? __alloc_workqueue_key+0x358/0x490
 ? __blockdev_direct_IO+0x14b/0x1c20
 __blockdev_direct_IO+0x32d/0x1c20
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 ? can_nocow_extent+0x490/0x490
 ? kvm_clock_read+0x1f/0x30
 ? can_nocow_extent+0x490/0x490
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 btrfs_direct_IO+0x227/0x400
 ? btrfs_run_delalloc_work+0x40/0x40
 generic_file_direct_write+0xcf/0x180
 btrfs_file_write_iter+0x308/0x58c
 aio_write+0xf8/0x1d0
 ? kvm_clock_read+0x1f/0x30
 ? __might_fault+0x3e/0x90
 io_submit_one+0x3a9/0x620
 ? io_submit_one+0xe5/0x620
 __ia32_compat_sys_io_submit+0xb2/0x270
 do_int80_syscall_32+0x5b/0x1a0
 entry_INT80_compat+0x88/0xa0

CC: [email protected] # 4.14+
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by: Kamal Mostafa <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by: Kleber Sacilotto de Souza <[email protected]>
commodo pushed a commit to commodo/linux that referenced this pull request Jun 6, 2019
ojeda added a commit to ojeda/linux that referenced this pull request Jul 2, 2021
rust: add support for calling some security functions.
akiernan pushed a commit to zuma-array/linux that referenced this pull request Nov 3, 2022
PD#150465: driver defect clean up:
torvalds#71
torvalds#77
torvalds#109
torvalds#127
torvalds#411
torvalds#600
torvalds#602
torvalds#603
torvalds#604
torvalds#611
torvalds#612

Change-Id: I38ac5ed6583bd6e57df9f42eaab04d05ee4ed663
Signed-off-by: Evoke Zhang <[email protected]>
akiernan pushed a commit to zuma-array/linux that referenced this pull request Nov 4, 2022
PD#150465: driver defect clean up:
torvalds#71
torvalds#77
torvalds#109
torvalds#127
torvalds#411
torvalds#600
torvalds#602
torvalds#603
torvalds#604
torvalds#611
torvalds#612

Change-Id: I38ac5ed6583bd6e57df9f42eaab04d05ee4ed663
Signed-off-by: Evoke Zhang <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants