From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.ozlabs.org (gandalf.ozlabs.org [150.107.74.76]) (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 A36C92B2CF; Sun, 30 Mar 2025 23:27:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743377278; cv=none; b=MEeFLbfZY0Nq1clWfaPmE0egq/ZdXvjQUkTy6zdwBj9KQIyahUCtBFxU0WVo8oriN/7a4WRuJp5EVADGDLqzAsqHRWIwo35dVSNeIZjRoR5rj06t0FlnVM92lDx5v9y2bWWc84CEjrh4x3jfWSaEgReTFtYdI3Opar0lbNDsXEQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743377278; c=relaxed/simple; bh=uABQICpb5JOJgV/Cp/Kl1YpgC4t3mLdzre5bn5FDk0k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=k2obM7hMyjtOkWHdRdR0FBp5ELZVOhzOHryOPwYOQimt99jhvS4O3KaQzGA0VDbzw9JGO9ZZE9Rm13quQykXu43EGjmhLe9K8zZLpDVuiyTFgAF6+ul9YorFwgqFrnJhBG+CaX9QyZLSXvPWrV+A0LkYB+JhQrH4/FHLp/Uevo4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=canb.auug.org.au; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=canb.auug.org.au; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canb.auug.org.au header.i=@canb.auug.org.au header.b=TOa23D1F; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=canb.auug.org.au Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=canb.auug.org.au Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canb.auug.org.au header.i=@canb.auug.org.au header.b="TOa23D1F" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canb.auug.org.au; s=202503; t=1743377270; bh=21CJhFAzmfRuzVtEe/k7/TVHSYBH4KcMA1jSdJWgpYk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=TOa23D1Fc8a6Ykma1S4zIYAuZqpLfy5SnD0gXOClPgltUqlJ7mstTIyWQxOuUWW3G IT/ua/x6R55ezoD/yy5alF5slK2NP7A1QaO0tMfe/EWNFMC5Hb7/yZCFYT9bb/a6ZR 0RBUcS49meS0BJWoibAcYFYJY4ljby9ObWiJ3/ryPEqZXIZB9Rt4Yi/gHDnyyod2Cx 7SceqYj7fMeubvlSiquGlexq0OyrvOa78bwF6gqUDCa7Q/9NQ8sOKQx3Ptk1Ud4UD1 vY6O23wv7xTQDKUJ8Ce+3u6jWG9z76S1yZ96i35HaWZwP4X4aoVlCaibFyz+mWgVdK o2FPgarNTnIRw== Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4ZQr5y2Dvnz4wcT; Mon, 31 Mar 2025 10:27:49 +1100 (AEDT) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 10:27:49 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Andrew Morton Cc: Daniel Borkmann , Alexei Starovoitov , Andrii Nakryiko , bpf , Networking , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Luiz Capitulino Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the mm tree Message-ID: <20250331102749.205e92cc@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20250311120422.1d9a8f80@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20250311120422.1d9a8f80@canb.auug.org.au> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/DkaGAb9f2IcT/mUQcffppWW"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 --Sig_/DkaGAb9f2IcT/mUQcffppWW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 12:04:22 +1100 Stephen Rothwell = wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in: >=20 > mm/page_owner.c >=20 > between commit: >=20 > a5bc091881fd ("mm: page_owner: use new iteration API") >=20 > from the mm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commit: >=20 > 8c57b687e833 ("mm, bpf: Introduce free_pages_nolock()") >=20 > from the bpf-next tree. >=20 > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree > is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly > complex conflicts. >=20 >=20 > diff --cc mm/page_owner.c > index 849d4a471b6c,90e31d0e3ed7..000000000000 > --- a/mm/page_owner.c > +++ b/mm/page_owner.c > @@@ -297,11 -293,17 +297,17 @@@ void __reset_page_owner(struct page *pa > =20 > page_owner =3D get_page_owner(page_ext); > alloc_handle =3D page_owner->handle; > + page_ext_put(page_ext); > =20 > - handle =3D save_stack(GFP_NOWAIT | __GFP_NOWARN); > + /* > + * Do not specify GFP_NOWAIT to make gfpflags_allow_spinning() =3D=3D = false > + * to prevent issues in stack_depot_save(). > + * This is similar to try_alloc_pages() gfp flags, but only used > + * to signal stack_depot to avoid spin_locks. > + */ > + handle =3D save_stack(__GFP_NOWARN); > - __update_page_owner_free_handle(page_ext, handle, order, current->pid, > + __update_page_owner_free_handle(page, handle, order, current->pid, > current->tgid, free_ts_nsec); > - page_ext_put(page_ext); > =20 > if (alloc_handle !=3D early_handle) > /* This is now a conflict between the mm-stable tree and Linus' tree. --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell --Sig_/DkaGAb9f2IcT/mUQcffppWW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAmfp03UACgkQAVBC80lX 0GydHAf/SSl7CnfA+w1FjKBoEKuslXX0qm4HBei/YnODIiR00ivzayOxItK0j8q8 TdMqZN07KPmXhTJo1Fns+tr+mc3NDZ3o7GXpRC4fTOKGPFKUM9MwU2ZKGjxZ4wck Oy0Du2DIrooPAkpg1xXVgTQYdRinpvxhRvXFxrEuUhNkA27CQjDnTW+ZYKjA9L5Z gkUe89+JU/RwlAnCheJDMD+CwIg+xh6GYlXPevd3xswvOC3x2ahToRk3LWMycm8k b0BVEIR0Oxx430ujXf0nsRMTcdLzj1q3Fi2M07FtG28pAAuY9hXzE/Ru6ZgSpbXZ 30hjcfI4hX0crtcDoRxOxwNI1gCaFA== =B7tM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/DkaGAb9f2IcT/mUQcffppWW--