Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] powerpc/crash: protect kdump from active watchdogs

[Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com>]

On 13/07/26 12:10, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
> Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com> writes:
>
>> On 13/07/26 10:51, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
>>> Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Changelog:
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>> v2:
>>>>    - Move H_WATCHDOG definitions to a common header for shared use
>>>>      across pseries code. 1/3
>>>>    - Added a new patch to handle pseries watchdog device registration
>>>>      failure. 2/3
>>>>    - Stop active watchdogs in crash hanlder. 3/3 Ritesh
>>>>    - Add suggested-by tag 1/3 & 3/3
>>> Reviewed the changes and mostly looks good with some minor nits added to
>>> the individual patches.
>>>
>>> Small request -
>>> Could you please also update test results with v3 in your changelog
>>> (since you mentioned we are able to reproduce the issue easily with your
>>> test code).
>> I tested this fix with the program I shared in cover letter. The watchdog
>> was successfully stopped even when H_WATCHDOG is called form crash
>> handler.  I will share my test details in v3 cover letter also.
>>
>>>
>>> aah one other thing I just noticed since you are ccing stable and you
>>> added a Fixes tag in patch-3.
>>> Patch-3 alone cannot be easily backported now due to patch-1 and
>>> patch-2. There must be a way to define the dependencies if you are
>>> looking for backporting the fix patch to stable tree, please check that
>>> and follow that accordingly in v3.
>> I thought about that as well, but since they are part of the same patch
>> series,
>> I assumed they would be picked together. However, I don't think that
>> will work
>> in all cases.
>>
>> I checked the older commits and noticed that a backport note was added.
>> I think
>> we can do the same for the fix patch. I'll add a note indicating that the
>> following patches should be backported first:
>>
>> powerpc/pseries: Move H_WATCHDOG definitions to a common header
>> powerpc/pseries: Handle and log pseries-wdt registration failures
>>
>> Since these patches are not upstream yet, I'll refer to them by their
>> commit titles.
>>
>> Does that look good to you?
>>
> Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
>    Note that for a patch series, you do not have to list as prerequisites the
>    patches present in the series itself. For example, if you have the following
>    patch series::
>
>      patch1
>      patch2
>
>    where patch2 depends on patch1, you do not have to list patch1 as
>    prerequisite of patch2 if you have already marked patch1 for stable
>    inclusion.
>
>
> In that case, I think, we should mark all 3 patches for stable inclusion.
>
>    patch 1/3   Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>    patch 2/3   Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>    patch 3/3   Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>                Fixes: 69472ffa6575 ("watchdog/pseries-wdt: initial support for H_WATCHDOG-based watchdog timers"

Okay, for stable tree inclusion, CCing is enough.

Thanks
Sourabh Jain