From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D35E242D95 for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2025 03:56:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755834981; cv=none; b=sncOMSi7g+94VXcGw1/vCbhMDP3aoo5gUt1XvyLchw3ZhODotHmIEioLsxS/35Ovo0V0jtEy4W8jlJSbnQbZLjG9zzKARbI0MTwP/uST8lccPYgbxbu9fu3lbgko8mU20CM03EoShnvaIILPKOmP9z0LtHmrUAvaVbNPAHvwaro= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755834981; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9Hp83wmclz//uj0hp2AHnHeBBbwGifqnIQuJWtiOWrY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=EF7XO/p5qfPBFg8yCYlnBC3tZsThra6jrUoguETnJNJ+pL5EU+D8Dv5KZzQRbzcOuf+fDW8SvqFaxL8w8KiU5Ox4cz+NcZ+4VCuKac4uU7VIFgJywKJ0ev+UOm4/hwPTjYAnnZzRLPekAbvy5Hi8JwFqnStSJTl306l6u3NltIw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=f4mWK1cD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="f4mWK1cD" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B699C113D0; Fri, 22 Aug 2025 03:56:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1755834980; bh=9Hp83wmclz//uj0hp2AHnHeBBbwGifqnIQuJWtiOWrY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=f4mWK1cDS3asBhfhW3ZzLKZPk5TyPNZ5lASmxYyrNP8czUceoOlG2TorxIu0m65lj 26+Qckh3Nxj7PyePViiyVOlIpFw0GWGmtYEgmr4tsVkbDWJv9tJvInA03IqVGdrcxU tkllLw3AxFsyP7RFYvzhWIZkZGElkWCKqXF3VpZpa/7W/e4QNvnsjaa+QSWDNfQRg5 9xmBcWrV2kdixO5jjKtDl4PCJvSXCofGxaz85X8uzzEl1yb9dUpMQAFM80KYtKp9RX 8ykXYk/rJdkwIRNxfWVDgx6ab86oZ5t7/78RWGIfOJo2Ha8haBi7rhVMPEg7TGTfoR 8sveQukEkNIhA== Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 23:56:19 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Eric Biggers Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, Herbert Xu Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.12.y 4/4] crypto: x86/aegis - Fix sleeping when disallowed on PREEMPT_RT Message-ID: References: <2025082102-shrug-unused-8ce2@gregkh> <20250822030617.1053172-1-sashal@kernel.org> <20250822030617.1053172-4-sashal@kernel.org> <20250822032304.GA80178@quark> <20250822033951.GB80178@quark> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250822033951.GB80178@quark> On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 11:39:51PM -0400, Eric Biggers wrote: >On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 11:28:56PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 11:23:04PM -0400, Eric Biggers wrote: >> > On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 11:06:17PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: >> > > From: Eric Biggers >> > > >> > > [ Upstream commit c7f49dadfcdf27e1f747442e874e9baa52ab7674 ] >> > > >> > > skcipher_walk_done() can call kfree(), which takes a spinlock, which >> > > makes it incorrect to call while preemption is disabled on PREEMPT_RT. >> > > Therefore, end the kernel-mode FPU section before calling >> > > skcipher_walk_done(), and restart it afterwards. >> > > >> > > Moreover, pass atomic=false to skcipher_walk_aead_encrypt() instead of >> > > atomic=true. The point of atomic=true was to make skcipher_walk_done() >> > > safe to call while in a kernel-mode FPU section, but that does not >> > > actually work. So just use the usual atomic=false. >> > > >> > > Fixes: 1d373d4e8e15 ("crypto: x86 - Add optimized AEGIS implementations") >> > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >> > > Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers >> > > Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu >> > > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin >> > > --- >> > > arch/x86/crypto/aegis128-aesni-glue.c | 8 ++++++-- >> > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > >> > 1. Missing Cc of the relevant mailing lists >> > 2. Missing cover letter >> >> This was sent following the instructions in the FAILED: email generated by >> Greg. If you feel its insufficient, take it up with him. > >You're one of the stable maintainers. You can't just deflect and claim >this is not your problem. We perform different parts of the process. I don't send FAILED: mails out, I don't have control over what Greg sends out. If you feel that the recipient list is insufficient then Greg should be in the loop - don't take it out on me. These mails looked the same for years (decade+?), if for some reason you think that a cover letter or an expanded cc list would be useful to have, then you can just suggest it - no need to berate me for not sending one. >> > 3. Missing base-commit, and doesn't apply to stable/linux-6.16.y >> >> As the subject line indicates, this applies on 6.12, not 6.16. >> >> > 4. Two different series were sent out, both containing this patch >> >> You might have missed that they're for different trees? >> > >Sorry, I meant to write 6.12. 6.12 was indeed what I tried to apply it >to, and it failed. And there are two series for 6.12, see >https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20250822030632.1053504-4-sashal@kernel.org >and >https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20250822030617.1053172-4-sashal@kernel.org/ Yup, those are replies to two different FAILED emails for two different patches that failed to backport. Could you share the conflict you've observed? Both series applied cleanly to stable/linux-6.12.y for me. >They were sent only 14 seconds apart, so these submissions appear to be >automated. Not too automated :) I fix up the backports, run builds, and go do something else. When I get back to the computer, if the builds passed, I just send out the mails. -- Thanks, Sasha