From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zanussi@kernel.org>
Message-ID: <1542557843.24510.3.camel@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Request for 3.18-stable: a63b03e2d247 ("mutex: Always clear
 owner field upon mutex_unlock()")
From: Tom Zanussi <zanussi@kernel.org>
To: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, stable@vger.kernel.org
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2018 10:17:23 -0600
In-Reply-To: <20181117132903.GM1706@sasha-vm>
References: <1542396159.7838.21.camel@kernel.org>
	 <20181117132903.GM1706@sasha-vm>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-ID: <stable.vger.kernel.org>

On Sat, 2018-11-17 at 08:29 -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 01:22:39PM -0600, Tom Zanussi wrote:
> > Hi Greg,
> > 
> > I noticed that 3.18.125 added commit bc07ee33284a ('Revert
> > "drm/i915:
> > Fix mutex->owner inspection race under DEBUG_MUTEXES"'), which
> > states
> > that the reason it can be applied is:
> > 
> >    The core fix was applied in
> > 
> >    commit a63b03e2d2477586440741677ecac45bcf28d7b1
> >    Author: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >    Date:   Tue Jan 6 10:29:35 2015 +0000
> > 
> >        mutex: Always clear owner field upon mutex_unlock()
> > 
> >    (note the absence of stable@ tag)
> > 
> >    so we can now revert our band-aid commit 226e5ae9e5f910 for
> > -next.
> > 
> > 
> > but that the commit referenced wasn't also pulled in.
> > 
> > Please consider pulling that one too if you're going to do another
> > 3.18
> > stable release.
> 
> Unless someone can ack that commit for stable (since it specifically
> states it shouldn't be included), I'd rather revert bc07ee33284a - it
> shouldn't have been merged in to begin with.
> 

Yeah, I agree that probably makes more sense - I think I misinterpreted
the meaning of 'note the absence of stable@ tag'.

Thanks,

Tom