From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E153AC2D0DC for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 21:28:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B27DD21D7D for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 21:28:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="K5NDO+/7" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726194AbgABV2k (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jan 2020 16:28:40 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-f196.google.com ([209.85.215.196]:40499 "EHLO mail-pg1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725851AbgABV2k (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jan 2020 16:28:40 -0500 Received: by mail-pg1-f196.google.com with SMTP id k25so22479118pgt.7 for ; Thu, 02 Jan 2020 13:28:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=hvpWTN6e4RnlgXWsJ95hXmR8kwS5bjTaUI17lXlqFb4=; b=K5NDO+/7A5gcJkr0169Vk6rRb+F08BFqVKjgtY3hle/mN3yW5qgCpM2+qsse+iVAjg SDoedQVZSUuAdQAxIlC4NufghQ7ADyHK2RO7yv31diYUxORr+EepiR0a7yM849QxqbZP mQRu8hsnZFCKRbNnvcei24IgiNjy2ZjfB1TcP7U0qpAsNo7HzlrhodPoGbOZGuhmA4OO zQe0LrfhnEXXsNBX121NYvWzyrLct/jV4I3VENp8XAPukiju9UTuPOJknKkUVpqd1uCi mfHh9sHu8iiM4paLqGhzoeBDRX+NrtX0Te2T1rUFYbK4SprV2+OyeJ0LVwMtV9q9sjpa mp1A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=hvpWTN6e4RnlgXWsJ95hXmR8kwS5bjTaUI17lXlqFb4=; b=cCslWa+5Lt3PIpdk0ZcT5Au4Ik9hxAg6F0sY3sBxQMXKiI9C1aCuNCjTAo9X2t8VzF O5wJr1oNJrCB3SD9RJp7vgjvSuh4+oBsVh/07ETXp10DvOokR7n8ZYBfY8qCCyNBblH8 iJTC4AesrT5xrs2lnXXERG06q7o+MGd03+CzFsl7RHugHSZTQU3VXEyJlL6XpAfFq3R4 trUrNrwXt74X+ev5okrpvgMcK1XKfWf8i6TqIDSkbKxJD0S7D5BD061KcV6nrnSDVORh X5ruEuWUENPKnvUHZQCVP/0njjSvNWsrmki8qHXO7lm9SoUFLCToUxLoZWhtsZquqeLg ohhw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXLkY/2iWTnRfKDuF0nuOeT+5bGPk54FQ6CvlnWyMZGtYl3vkk2 UpDgc/HUoGx3cyQAEKiP0I4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxoKDzOwCnUMaJ9zy15JFpUknLmupbULghr0LLxSB0UKHZvQ1fRW3Ub3/gVRkESCOPWXHVSXg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:f107:: with SMTP id f7mr92451094pgi.76.1578000519308; Thu, 02 Jan 2020 13:28:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2600:1700:e321:62f0:329c:23ff:fee3:9d7c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w11sm64002644pfn.4.2020.01.02.13.28.37 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 02 Jan 2020 13:28:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2020 13:28:37 -0800 From: Guenter Roeck To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: stable , Stephen Boyd Subject: Re: Clock related crashes in v5.4.y-queue Message-ID: <20200102212837.GA9400@roeck-us.net> References: <029dab5a-22f5-c4e9-0797-54cdba0f3539@roeck-us.net> <20200102210119.GA250861@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200102210119.GA250861@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 10:01:19PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 06:44:08PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I see a number of crashes in the latest v5.4.y-queue; please see below > > for details. The problem bisects to commit 54a311c5d3988d ("clk: Fix memory > > leak in clk_unregister()"). > > > > The context suggests recovery from a failed driver probe, and it appears > > that the memory is released twice. Interestingly, I don't see the problem > > in mainline. > > > > I would suggest to drop that patch from the stable queue. > > That does not look right, as you point out, so I will go drop it now. > > The logic of the clk structure lifetimes seems crazy, messing with krefs > and just "knowing" the lifecycle of the other structures seems like a > problem just waiting to happen... > I agree. While the patch itself seems to be ok per Stephen's feedback, we have to assume that there will be more secondary failures in addition to the one I have discovered. Given that clocks are not normally unregistered, I don't think fixing the memory leak is important enough to risk the stability of stable releases. With all that in mind, I'd rather have this in mainline for a prolonged period of time before considering it for stable release (if at all). Thanks, Guenter