There are some AA deadlock issues in kmemleak, similar to the situation
reported by Breno [1]. The deadlock path is as follows:
mem_pool_alloc()
-> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&kmemleak_lock, flags);
-> pr_warn()
-> netconsole subsystem
-> netpoll
-> __alloc_skb
-> __create_object
-> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&kmemleak_lock, flags);
To solve this problem, switch to printk_safe mode before printing warning
message, this will redirect all printk()-s to a special per-CPU buffer,
which will be flushed later from a safe context (irq work), and this
deadlock problem can be avoided. The proper API to use should be
printk_deferred_enter()/printk_deferred_exit() [2]. Another way is to
place the warn print after kmemleak is released.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250731-kmemleak_lock-v1-1-728fd470198f@debian…
[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/5ca375cd-4a20-4807-b897-68b289626550@redhat.com/
====================
Signed-off-by: Gu Bowen <gubowen5(a)huawei.com>
---
mm/kmemleak.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/kmemleak.c b/mm/kmemleak.c
index 84265983f239..1ac56ceb29b6 100644
--- a/mm/kmemleak.c
+++ b/mm/kmemleak.c
@@ -437,9 +437,15 @@ static struct kmemleak_object *__lookup_object(unsigned long ptr, int alias,
else if (untagged_objp == untagged_ptr || alias)
return object;
else {
+ /*
+ * Printk deferring due to the kmemleak_lock held.
+ * This is done to avoid deadlock.
+ */
+ printk_deferred_enter();
kmemleak_warn("Found object by alias at 0x%08lx\n",
ptr);
dump_object_info(object);
+ printk_deferred_exit();
break;
}
}
@@ -736,6 +742,11 @@ static int __link_object(struct kmemleak_object *object, unsigned long ptr,
else if (untagged_objp + parent->size <= untagged_ptr)
link = &parent->rb_node.rb_right;
else {
+ /*
+ * Printk deferring due to the kmemleak_lock held.
+ * This is done to avoid deadlock.
+ */
+ printk_deferred_enter();
kmemleak_stop("Cannot insert 0x%lx into the object search tree (overlaps existing)\n",
ptr);
/*
@@ -743,6 +754,7 @@ static int __link_object(struct kmemleak_object *object, unsigned long ptr,
* be freed while the kmemleak_lock is held.
*/
dump_object_info(parent);
+ printk_deferred_exit();
return -EEXIST;
}
}
@@ -856,13 +868,8 @@ static void delete_object_part(unsigned long ptr, size_t size,
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&kmemleak_lock, flags);
object = __find_and_remove_object(ptr, 1, objflags);
- if (!object) {
-#ifdef DEBUG
- kmemleak_warn("Partially freeing unknown object at 0x%08lx (size %zu)\n",
- ptr, size);
-#endif
+ if (!object)
goto unlock;
- }
/*
* Create one or two objects that may result from the memory block
@@ -882,8 +889,14 @@ static void delete_object_part(unsigned long ptr, size_t size,
unlock:
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&kmemleak_lock, flags);
- if (object)
+ if (object) {
__delete_object(object);
+ } else {
+#ifdef DEBUG
+ kmemleak_warn("Partially freeing unknown object at 0x%08lx (size %zu)\n",
+ ptr, size);
+#endif
+ }
out:
if (object_l)
--
2.43.0
Hi Stable,
Please provide a quote for your products:
Include:
1.Pricing (per unit)
2.Delivery cost & timeline
3.Quote expiry date
Deadline: September
Thanks!
Kamal Prasad
Albinayah Trading
Hi,
We’re offering verified business contact data for the upcoming Fruit Attraction 2025 (FA), tailored for effective outreach before and after the event.
Place: Madrid, Spain
Date:SEP 30 - OCT 02, 2025
Contact Overview:
1,01,351 Attendees
2,179 Exhibiting Companies
6,537 Verified Exhibitor Contacts
Total: 107,885 Business Contacts
Each entry includes: Name, Job Title, Company, Website, Address, Phone, Official Email, LinkedIn Profile, and more.
Get your list in just 48 hours—100% GDPR-compliant Data.
If you'd like more details, just reply: “Send me pricing”
Best regards,
Juanita Garcia
Sr. Marketing Manager
To opt out reply “Not Interested.”
From: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin(a)siemens.com>
KCSAN reports:
BUG: KCSAN: data-race in do_raw_write_lock / do_raw_write_lock
write (marked) to 0xffff800009cf504c of 4 bytes by task 1102 on cpu 1:
do_raw_write_lock+0x120/0x204
_raw_write_lock_irq
do_exit
call_usermodehelper_exec_async
ret_from_fork
read to 0xffff800009cf504c of 4 bytes by task 1103 on cpu 0:
do_raw_write_lock+0x88/0x204
_raw_write_lock_irq
do_exit
call_usermodehelper_exec_async
ret_from_fork
value changed: 0xffffffff -> 0x00000001
Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on:
CPU: 0 PID: 1103 Comm: kworker/u4:1 6.1.111
Commit 1a365e822372 ("locking/spinlock/debug: Fix various data races") has
adressed most of these races, but seems to be not consistent/not complete.
From do_raw_write_lock() only debug_write_lock_after() part has been
converted to WRITE_ONCE(), but not debug_write_lock_before() part.
Do it now.
Cc: stable(a)vger.kernel.org
Fixes: 1a365e822372 ("locking/spinlock/debug: Fix various data races")
Reported-by: Adrian Freihofer <adrian.freihofer(a)siemens.com>
Acked-by: Waiman Long <longman(a)redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin(a)siemens.com>
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck(a)kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng(a)gmail.com>
---
Notes:
SubmissionLink: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250826102731.52507-1-alexander.sverdlin@sieme…
kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c b/kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c
index 87b03d2e41db..2338b3adfb55 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c
@@ -184,8 +184,8 @@ void do_raw_read_unlock(rwlock_t *lock)
static inline void debug_write_lock_before(rwlock_t *lock)
{
RWLOCK_BUG_ON(lock->magic != RWLOCK_MAGIC, lock, "bad magic");
- RWLOCK_BUG_ON(lock->owner == current, lock, "recursion");
- RWLOCK_BUG_ON(lock->owner_cpu == raw_smp_processor_id(),
+ RWLOCK_BUG_ON(READ_ONCE(lock->owner) == current, lock, "recursion");
+ RWLOCK_BUG_ON(READ_ONCE(lock->owner_cpu) == raw_smp_processor_id(),
lock, "cpu recursion");
}
--
2.51.0
Within two-step API update let's provide 2 new MBX operations:
1) request PF's link state (speed & up/down) - as legacy approach became
obsolete for new E610 adapter and link state data can't be correctly
provided - increasing API to 1.6
2) ask PF about supported features - for some time there is quite a mess in
negotiating API versions caused by too loose approach in adding new
specific (not supported by all of the drivers capable of linking with
ixgbevf) feature and corresponding API versions. Now list of supported
features is provided by MBX operation - increasing API to 1.7
Jedrzej Jagielski (4):
ixgbevf: fix getting link speed data for E610 devices
ixgbe: handle IXGBE_VF_GET_PF_LINK_STATE mailbox operation
ixgbevf: fix mailbox API compatibility by negotiating supported
features
ixgbe: handle IXGBE_VF_FEATURES_NEGOTIATE mbox cmd
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_mbx.h | 15 ++
.../net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_sriov.c | 79 ++++++++
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbevf/defines.h | 1 +
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbevf/ipsec.c | 10 +
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbevf/ixgbevf.h | 7 +
.../net/ethernet/intel/ixgbevf/ixgbevf_main.c | 34 +++-
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbevf/mbx.h | 8 +
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbevf/vf.c | 182 +++++++++++++++---
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbevf/vf.h | 1 +
9 files changed, 304 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
--
2.31.1
Hi Luca Weiss and Tamura Dai,
On 9/12/25 02:24, Luca Weiss wrote:
> Hi Tamura,
>
> On Fri Sep 12, 2025 at 9:01 AM CEST, Tamura Dai wrote:
>> The bug is a typo in the compatible string for the touchscreen node.
>> According to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/edt-ft5x06.yaml,
>> the correct compatible is "focaltech,ft8719", but the device tree used
>> "focaltech,fts8719".
>
> +Joel
>
> I don't think this patch is really correct, in the sdm845-mainline fork
> there's a different commit which has some more changes to make the
> touchscreen work:
>
> https://gitlab.com/sdm845-mainline/linux/-/commit/2ca76ac2e046158814b043fd4…
Yes, this patch is not correct. My commit from the gitlab repo is the
correct one. But I personally don't have the shiftmq6 device to smoke
test before sending the patch. That's why I was hesitant to send it
upstream. I have now requested someone to confirm if the touchscreen
works with my gitlab commit. If if its all good, I will send the correct
patch later.
Regards,
Joel