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=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable 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 BF209C43613 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 20:21:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94FA320679 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 20:21:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1561407717; bh=/rV1TlvYuXOK2sFci2/p6W21rW/APz4/kUsj3EobUV4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=R8TXqdKhLIc9pg9TUZbR1QiUe4MEjAB1vPoDG/H/xAfyLq5lAd8gVcQzEjp6pUO8k 9wv4pe8s/UR47UgiKyfnL/A7h3nWTNEruqCLe5pKNhieQMYwyhKGX18nn0Wp566eJW QBeLLQ0uYAPJbtJhRJKC73aY6kmESx7r3RTm9cD4= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730690AbfFXUVx (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2019 16:21:53 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:48892 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726393AbfFXUVw (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2019 16:21:52 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [167.220.24.221]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6755E20645; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 20:21:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1561407711; bh=/rV1TlvYuXOK2sFci2/p6W21rW/APz4/kUsj3EobUV4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=2VPaEOiYLx/B1U7xl+3URPJW/PCnea+Hoo4lmR8kq/6n244//CX5FcosNOr1Dj3oq kZ/WOwKR+mt0aTbDmzXkGDY61uNn7Pw8n0E1ZmPY1FmKSwRlrgS69rOqWLgsC9nNQT I7qwRnBg2lc/TFX9Q7IzCpvfO5IQUktLdI8ucdSE= Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 16:21:50 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Ajay Kaher Cc: aarcange@redhat.com, jannh@google.com, oleg@redhat.com, peterx@redhat.com, rppt@linux.ibm.com, jgg@mellanox.com, mhocko@suse.com, jglisse@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mike.kravetz@oracle.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, riandrews@android.com, arve@android.com, yishaih@mellanox.com, dledford@redhat.com, sean.hefty@intel.com, hal.rosenstock@gmail.com, matanb@mellanox.com, leonro@mellanox.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, srivatsab@vmware.com, amakhalov@vmware.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] [v4.9.y] coredump: fix race condition between mmget_not_zero()/get_task_mm() and core dumping Message-ID: <20190624202150.GC3881@sasha-vm> References: <1561410186-3919-1-git-send-email-akaher@vmware.com> <1561410186-3919-4-git-send-email-akaher@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1561410186-3919-4-git-send-email-akaher@vmware.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 02:33:06AM +0530, Ajay Kaher wrote: >coredump: fix race condition between mmget_not_zero()/get_task_mm() >and core dumping > >[PATCH v4 1/3]: >Backporting of commit 04f5866e41fb70690e28397487d8bd8eea7d712a upstream. > >[PATCH v4 2/3]: >Extension of commit 04f5866e41fb to fix the race condition between >get_task_mm() and core dumping for IB->mlx4 and IB->mlx5 drivers. > >[PATCH v4 3/3] >Backporting of commit 59ea6d06cfa9247b586a695c21f94afa7183af74 upstream. > >[diff from v3]: >- added [PATCH v4 3/3] Why do all the patches have the same subject line? I guess it's correct for the first one, but can you explain what's up with #2 and #3? If the second one isn't upstream, please explain in detail why not and how 4.9 differs from upstream so that it requires a custom backport. The third one just looks like a different patch altogether with a wrong subject line? -- Thanks, Sasha