Re: [PATCH] tick/nohz: Fix cpu_is_hotpluggable() by checking with nohz subsystem

[Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 08:32:30AM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Jan 20, 2023, at 2:05 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 08:44:35PM +0000, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> >> For CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL systems, the tick_do_timer_cpu cannot be offlined.
> >> However, cpu_is_hotpluggable() still returns true for those CPUs. This causes
> >> torture tests that do offlining to end up trying to offline this CPU causing
> >> test failures. Such failure happens on all architectures.
> >> 
> >> Fix it by asking the opinion of the nohz subsystem on whether the CPU can
> >> be hotplugged.
> >> 
> >> [ Apply Frederic Weisbecker feedback on refactoring tick_nohz_cpu_down(). ]
> >> 
> >> Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
> >> Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
> >> Cc: Zhouyi Zhou <zhouzhouyi@gmail.com>
> >> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> >> Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> >> Cc: rcu <rcu@vger.kernel.org>
> >> Fixes: 2987557f52b9 ("driver-core/cpu: Expose hotpluggability to the rest of the kernel")
> >> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
> > 
> > Also want to cc: stable on the patch?
> 
> Oh sure, sorry. For some reason I thought Sasha and your AI scripts
> were looking at the Linux-kernel list as well. Or are they, and a Cc
> to stable is just to be doubly sure?

As per the rules we have had for the last 15+ years, always add a cc:
stable to be sure that the patch will be considered for stable releases.
If not, you are on you own and sometimes we might notice it, others not.

See:
    https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
for the details.

thanks,

greg k-h