From: Nathan Lynch <nathan.lynch@amd.com>
To: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>, Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@intel.com>
Cc: <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "dmaengine: dmatest: Fix dmatest waiting less when interrupted"
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 17:22:49 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <871ptu8jt2.fsf@AUSNATLYNCH.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250403-dmaengine-dmatest-revert-waiting-less-v1-1-8227c5a3d7c8@amd.com>
Nathan Lynch <nathan.lynch@amd.com> writes:
> Several issues with this change:
>
> * The analysis is flawed and it's unclear what problem is being
> fixed. There is no difference between wait_event_freezable_timeout()
> and wait_event_timeout() with respect to device interrupts. And of
> course "the interrupt notifying the finish of an operation happens
> during wait_event_freezable_timeout()" -- that's how it's supposed
> to work.
>
> * The link at the "Closes:" tag appears to be an unrelated
> use-after-free in idxd.
>
> * It introduces a regression: dmatest threads are meant to be
> freezable and this change breaks that.
>
> See discussion here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/dmaengine/878qpa13fe.fsf@AUSNATLYNCH.amd.com/
>
> Fixes: e87ca16e9911 ("dmaengine: dmatest: Fix dmatest waiting less when interrupted")
> Signed-off-by: Nathan Lynch <nathan.lynch@amd.com>
I'm puzzled by the silence here. This is a clear regression fix and
Vinicius agreed that the change should be reverted in the original
thread.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-14 22:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-03 16:24 Nathan Lynch via B4 Relay
2025-04-14 22:22 ` Nathan Lynch [this message]
2025-04-17 15:18 ` Vinod Koul
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=871ptu8jt2.fsf@AUSNATLYNCH.amd.com \
--to=nathan.lynch@amd.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vinicius.gomes@intel.com \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®