Re: Fwd: RCU stalls with wireguard over bonding over igb on Linux 6.3.0+

["Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>]

On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 07:18:32AM +0200, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03.07.23 04:09, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 08:34:01AM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jul 02, 2023 at 03:46:38PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> >>> I've got an overdue patch that I still need to submit to netdev, which
> >>> I suspect might actually fix this.
> >>>
> >>> Can you let me know if
> >>> https://git.zx2c4.com/wireguard-linux/patch/?id=54d5e4329efe0d1dba8b4a58720d29493926bed0
> >>> solves the problem?
> >>
> >> The reporter on Bugzilla [1] said it fixed the regression, so telling
> >> regzbot:
> >>
> >> #regzbot fix: 54d5e4329efe0d
> > 
> > That's not correct.
> 
> Yeah, the gitsha will only work when it's stable.
> 
> > I tend to send patches to netdev@, not pulls, so the
> > commit is going to be different. Just leave this alone for a bit and
> > tidy things up once everything hits the main trees.
> 
> Kinda right, but otoh this makes things this slightly annoying bit
> harder for regression tracking. But as the patch subject rarely changes,
> this can usually be avoided by using:
> 
> #regzbot fix: wireguard: queueing: use saner cpu selection wrapping

Here's the final sha:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git/commit/?id=7387943fa35516f6f8017a3b0e9ce48a3bef9faa