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 D4DB318646 for ; Fri, 27 Oct 2023 12:16:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="N7YUwcJF" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0A6D0C43391; Fri, 27 Oct 2023 12:16:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1698409007; bh=4NRUlTmk1LuMcKNw3A1i1UU6nGDzxkPn/7MnfP+vx0k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=N7YUwcJFEbmTMB2amn0vCRT5AIo9J+oPZ8RpvrzxMixPxDTxyQgtqTzhp+HR8ftbC xql6Y6+Zh9+nxy5JeI/7ORnJ1UzPsJN25lMN0cAKamgY7h4fjpOdGFxzd7m1Z08Yue m3qGUe1jzzloMzUPmzxzlUYg1IJuRODAiIOoIQIc= Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 14:16:44 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Oliver Hartkopp Cc: Lukas Magel , patches@lists.linux.dev, Maxime Jayat , Marc Kleine-Budde , Sasha Levin , stable@vger.kernel.org, Michal Sojka Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.1 043/131] can: isotp: isotp_sendmsg(): fix TX state detection and wait behavior Message-ID: <2023102721-voltage-thyself-e881@gregkh> References: <20231016084000.050926073@linuxfoundation.org> <20231016084001.142952122@linuxfoundation.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: patches@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 08:34:30PM +0200, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > Hello Lukas, hello Greg, > > this patch fixed the issue introduced with > > 79e19fa79cb5 ("can: isotp: isotp_ops: fix poll() to not report false > EPOLLOUT events") > > for Linux 6.1 and Linux 6.5 which is fine. > > Unfortunately the problematic patch has also been applied to 5.15 and 5.10 > (referencing another upstream commit as it needed a backport). > > @Lukas: The 5.x code is much more similar to the latest code, so would it > probably fix the issue to remove the "wq_has_sleeper(&so->wait)" condition? > > @Greg: I double checked the changes and fixes from the latest 6.6 kernel > compared to the 5.10 when isotp.c was introduced in the mainline kernel. > Would it be ok, to "backport" the latest 6.6 code to the 5.x LTS trees? > It really is the same isotp code but only some kernel API functions and > names have been changed. Sure, if you think it is ok, please send the backported and tested patch series and we will be glad to review them. thanks, greg k-h