From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD66ECA9EAF for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 21:56:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B6AC20679 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 21:56:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1572213361; bh=z2RhxKEQPlRZW4eD8Oy082GTKp896wSkrUjyrFvTvd8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=V3NXW5pXNWcKUQXkunP+wyz2xf8MBUrCmjJBD66kBSFeFprFTnliSqmP9PyDxEaCO rkw8vp78/CEqn5tDwzaht3M6RQgzCHeMYQ/tfwe3uRAW59oImk3N8jwS76IHRy3Q+s Ua6f9rTMIVXuhZUWc9LGm5Yly6rDW24EMzfAbe/s= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727436AbfJ0V4B (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Oct 2019 17:56:01 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:58478 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727135AbfJ0V4B (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Oct 2019 17:56:01 -0400 Received: from localhost (100.50.158.77.rev.sfr.net [77.158.50.100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 87F2320679; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 21:55:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1572213360; bh=z2RhxKEQPlRZW4eD8Oy082GTKp896wSkrUjyrFvTvd8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=lwnTJRdL0V3oei+NcJB3BsGqbaNvIawOp1h4/8In2LN8vQzEwvmuujDvkCj3ITwqT Si/a4FQBtKAgfN+bNvWMH0dJcyhWR7LI+rc4nvF9qhKYQDiUhjyMoofLQxNuzb8JaG SocOiGdRIIcXZF5hbWDCJ6nae6/DDD3e7zx6Gxhg= Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2019 17:55:57 -0400 From: Sasha Levin To: Jens Axboe Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: io_uring stable 5.3 backports Message-ID: <20191027215557.GG1560@sasha-vm> References: <20191027085204.GA1560@sasha-vm> <20191027134832.GD1560@sasha-vm> <4dab77cb-0e29-15af-bb32-26ee23de3f69@kernel.dk> <20191027142415.GE1560@sasha-vm> <981a3436-e8a0-f13d-d33c-1aa53114fc64@kernel.dk> <20191027181057.GF1560@sasha-vm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 12:54:23PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >On 10/27/19 12:10 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 10:18:12AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> On 10/27/19 8:24 AM, Sasha Levin wrote: >>>> On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 08:03:09AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>> On 10/27/19 7:48 AM, Sasha Levin wrote: >>>>>> On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 06:01:03AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>>>> On 10/27/19 2:52 AM, Sasha Levin wrote: >>>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 05:33:41PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For some reason I forgot to mark these stable, but they should go >>>>>>>>> into stable. In order of applying them, they are: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> bc808bced39f4e4b626c5ea8c63d5e41fce7205a >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This commit says it fixes c576666863b78 ("io_uring: optimize >>>>>>>> submit_and_wait API") which is not in the stable tree. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ef03681ae8df770745978148a7fb84796ae99cba >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This commit doesn't say so, but really it fixes 5262f567987d3 >>>>>>>> ("io_uring: IORING_OP_TIMEOUT support") which is not in the stable tree. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> a1f58ba46f794b1168d1107befcf3d4b9f9fd453 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Same as the commit above. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Oh man, sorry about that, I always forget to check if all of them are in >>>>>>> 5.3. I blame the fact that I backport everything to our internal tree, >>>>>>> which is 5.2 based. But yes, you are of course right, those three can be >>>>>>> dropped. >>>>>> >>>>>> How much "secret sauce" does your internal tree have? Is it something >>>>>> we can peek into to make sure we don't miss fixes? >>>>> >>>>> There's no secret sauce in the internal tree, it's just that I backport >>>>> everything into the 5.2 version that is our newest. It's fully uptodate >>>>> with 5.4-rc and in some cases what's queued up for 5.5 as well. Hence I >>>>> sometimes forget to check what is applicable to 5.3-stable, since I have >>>>> it in our 5.2 tree... >>>>> >>>>> The internal tree is just backports. That's how we do things. >>>> >>>> Could you push it somewhere public? I could automate grabbing fixes off >>>> of it. >>> >>> There a few reasons why that hasn't been done, and none of them are >>> related to the actual code/patches in there.. >>> >>> But I don't think it would help you. The io_uring branch is a mix of >>> things that have gone into the current window (and may or may not need >>> to go to stable), and things that are queued up for the next kernel >>> versions (and aren't going to stable). This will just continue to drift >>>from stable, until we respin a new kernel version internally. >> >> My thinking here was that: >> >> 1. I have a bunch of scripts that determine whether a given patch is >> relevant to any stable kernel branch. >> 2. I have a machine learning toy that can help me kick patches for >> review. >> >> Running both on your tree means I can (let's say once a week) get a list >> of probably fixes that are in your tree but are not in upstream stable >> trees and might need to be there. > >If you want to play with it, I can certainly create a mirror of my 5.2 >based io_uring FB branch and push it somewhere. Whenever I add to the FB >branch, I'll add to the public one as well so they will stay in sync. I'd be happy to try. We already do something similar to distro trees, so it's just a matter of adding this tree to the list. >Only concern is that on at least on occassion, I ended up pushing a >patch to the FB repo too soon. That then results in something like this: > >commit 4c5a7042904f689d981ef6faa45f6a09e8669db1 >Author: Jens Axboe >Date: Thu Oct 17 16:32:06 2019 -0600 > > io_uring: fixup "io_uring: fix up O_NONBLOCK handling for sockets" > > Matches the offending commit with upstream commit 491381ce07ca. > > Fixes: 0d79665c5f18 ("io_uring: fix up O_NONBLOCK handling for sockets") > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe > >where I commit an incremental patch to sync with the patch that went >upstream, which differed slightly from what I had committed internally. >This is the only one of those I have. > >Another one I have a single commit of is where I made an error doing >conflict resolution: > >commit 5d79f6ee5f2ed5d0efc6e7698abed1516cd2c416 >Author: Jens Axboe >Date: Tue Oct 22 13:00:20 2019 -0600 > > io_uring: fix merge error > > Due to a merge error, we never got 'ret' set in the common case. > This hasn't caused any issues, and gcc is buggy and doesn't warn > about it, but let's get it in there so we're synced with upstream. > > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe > >If you're fine with that, I can make the external copy of the FB >io_uring branch match the internal one. Let's give it a go, I'll start by staying a week+ behind the tip and audit any out of tree patches such as the above manually. -- Thanks, Sasha