From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from r3-20.sinamail.sina.com.cn (r3-20.sinamail.sina.com.cn [202.108.3.20]) (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 4D6DA3C1D67 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 10:27:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.108.3.20 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787740071; cv=none; b=SVdW7qbAlX2T8i9K6Y2ca2bZw4yeC5lyJaX0Cp93QtYjdzk28i1dOKAAm74lygSZB3mvfwt0rVfh76ytBubIGAXGcRHsg+kSETGYLVJ3hxr4wmqILLFtu3GMl8FOWc7yA3xqqihBr2tIuhIkp93XOnLARO+2bV5+F9gakSePOYA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1787740071; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Y1pHpqz9//ulna1bs7VQAlliILT8I00xc0CdnxJv0VU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=UbXZHvv8hu9X9BZs24n3IpqW4YqlQCJ7Gt7bP3mgELOP3d6CPvnvKl+Zr8Lu2t2yJMy7QLaBiVSpAYKpWPMlyJ1HrqgW6OCXVSRz5txrfWdQM6YTtjy/NusM2GTpZOYXSE48v4DnOQwx9TDQZaT+zfGjwiNzM3+IbIMuXcRS4As= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sina.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sina.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sina.com header.i=@sina.com header.b=mjcMSLOZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.108.3.20 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sina.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sina.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sina.com header.i=@sina.com header.b="mjcMSLOZ" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sina.com; s=201208; t=1787740063; bh=6xTlKpsDlJOqs3W/yjXrpkuyHUwmKAvYUndEqH2KEDA=; h=From:Subject:Date:Message-ID; b=mjcMSLOZPSJQfYRxLJk1JXda7TFczO/kg59VFiRrFIHQdfoA8h/OKnj5FPXL47SDd 7aFoKUoLMuaU0zXkL2EBUck1ZF2lfuct8/RC95M2elQ8Kn+0riCi8/tgFMCmNon9uJ 3FBfaTVzFErFckbMnc/LxVFBTkGsj7z4Ou9bwvQs= X-SMAIL-HELO: localhost.localdomain Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain)([114.249.62.194]) by sina.com (10.54.253.32) with ESMTP id 6A8EBF8E00005DA2; Wed, 26 Aug 2026 18:27:32 +0800 (CST) X-Sender: hdanton@sina.com X-Auth-ID: hdanton@sina.com Authentication-Results: sina.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=hdanton@sina.com; dkim=none header.i=none; dmarc=none action=none header.from=hdanton@sina.com X-SMAIL-MID: 2621944456833 X-SMAIL-UIID: 5DB360D79E3D4E9E9F65D737821476E2-20260826-182732-1 From: Hillf Danton To: Eric Dumazet Cc: "Shin'ichiro Kawasaki" , syzbot , Nilay Shroff , Keith Busch , boqun@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [syzbot] [net?] WARNING: locking bug in tcp_tsq_handler Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2026 18:27:16 +0800 Message-ID: <20260826102718.1550-1-hdanton@sina.com> In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Wed, 26 Aug 2026 06:05:15 +0200 Eric Dumazet wrote: >On Wed, Aug 26, 2026 at 5:06 AM Hillf Danton wrote: >> On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 22:26:25 +0900 Shin'ichiro Kawasaki wrote: >> >On Aug 25, 2026 / 14:45, Hillf Danton wrote: >> >> On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 14:44:35 +0900 Shin'ichiro Kawasaki wrote: >> >> > On Aug 25, 2026 / 03:50, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > > I think 19bdb70c77d3 should be reverted. >> >> > >> >> > Just reverting the commit will reintroduce the other lockdep WARN that the >> >> > commit addressed. I hope to have another fix to avoid the WARN. >> >> > >> >> I do not think you know the root cause of that lockdep warn, so reverting >> >> 19bdb70c77d3 is the right thing to do because of [11, 12]. >> >> >> >> [11] ffa1e7ada456 ("block: Make request_queue lockdep splats show up earlier") >> >> [12] Subject: Re: [PATCH] nbd: don't warn when reclassifying a busy socket lock >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20260816014906.1149-1-hdanton@sina.com/ >> > >> > I took a look in the commit [11] and the discussion [12], but couldn't follow >> > why the commit 19bdb70c77d3 should be reverted. Could you elaborate a bit more >> > about the reason you suggest the revert? >> > >> The Fixes tag in d532cddb6c60 proves Eric delivered a HBC, half baked croissant, >> to lore. And the nvme-tcp tucked in the HBC hints Eric copied something from >> somewhere. Finally the absence of ffa1e7ada456 in 19bdb70c77d3 proves it is >> worse than a HBC. Clear dude? Or go to read [12] again? > > linux development is iterative, we do not submit a single patch fixing > 1000 bugs at once. > The iterative word fails to justify you can submit any fix before understanding the root cause. > I decided to ignore your rants a long time ago, as many others did. > Your HBC forced you to quiese instead just like the ostrich burying his head in sand. > How many bugs did you fix last year? More than 150 [13]. [13] Subject: Re: some works in 2025 https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20251112225650.9224-1-hdanton@sina.com/