From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (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 39F702737F9 for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2025 09:24:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751016246; cv=none; b=gJ/prLnzOQT45XT3xg8HZJbiKms5uBI/nnFEsvuGfjcjmG65+PXpLR2/Li5nhAR9cLdHLIR3wyQbiugY8vKfFOps3fzccOPiyIPw8fakSXUycmJRusvazmQIHuU2gapSip9C/4guW7pVHuLFpdEQHF2lXoDxdyntQhnNe/D3k/o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751016246; c=relaxed/simple; bh=VKQBj2stu7iXeJd9KQUHIkIoUgY637IlmEQqau/g0Jk=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=lcwP7i7E3z4ZSNcVEMlOm99rgulbzWA6RNsXwATNYFZtkvoC/TKTNB0tuLvSWqo00lbdoOp40H+J9tm6qtWLrlew5vooKgRw7sdY5JVABsTdcn40YGEVdvOHMwctldjlqEY14RM9nKGvF8jmPRbsvY3RDXMGPmd5o+8BoL3n43M= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=r6Tgp/P6; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="r6Tgp/P6" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=J4ZjnT6oCMq1CKTCNR3HCJ0iSz8drwLRwfHKoiq9yKA=; t=1751016245; x=1752225845; b=r6Tgp/P6/GUZOIbQebXQIaXw2CEvcGL7OY/jmZ5zZvjVD1k 3NAHvd01qqLsW9qFufVCRlSs+ws5ykLZXxPWU+G+0Q/ySsDzcRXDLpF8wrfYDbyXgwCVec14wAffx J4yQpI1ki4dVOIMNsYmkalYvIcpAfec0bynflemxLp9UkcEA3pSt/C4Mtqyfo8/vGzzhMi7ZCECVp GpDsr9JWidX+9yuayDuUJnbgNh5aMz0Jn5eztaCZzlqFSKYXK9nhevPLQSRA+EAqhoZm7qNiyMGDa eC7ieUUByA/uUqIDmFcVpXOvsf4McGUKFK7AmqpCe94K1FV0434P4dB9eZp16crQ==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uV5JP-0000000DS2I-3RBo; Fri, 27 Jun 2025 11:24:00 +0200 Message-ID: <94de787f4c3ad6fc3a44c50c2a5d5311861ddd6c.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] um: virt-pci: Switch to msi_create_parent_irq_domain() From: Johannes Berg To: Nam Cao Cc: Marc Zyngier , Thomas Gleixner , Richard Weinberger , Anton Ivanov , linux-um@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 11:23:58 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20250627084943.nCYOI4Vp@linutronix.de> References: <45f44f0298259abf1862b965805307b7c01a279d.camel@sipsolutions.net> <20250627084943.nCYOI4Vp@linutronix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.56.2 (3.56.2-1.fc42) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Fri, 2025-06-27 at 10:49 +0200, Nam Cao wrote: >=20 > Thanks for testing! The later kernel crash should be fixed with: >=20 > diff --git a/arch/um/drivers/virt-pci.c b/arch/um/drivers/virt-pci.c > index e51a9357934da..557d93aea00a1 100644 > --- a/arch/um/drivers/virt-pci.c > +++ b/arch/um/drivers/virt-pci.c > @@ -407,7 +407,6 @@ static const struct irq_domain_ops um_pci_inner_domai= n_ops =3D { > =20 > #define UM_PCI_MSI_FLAGS_REQUIRED (MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_DOM_OPS | \ > MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_CHIP_OPS | \ > - MSI_FLAG_PCI_MSI_MASK_PARENT | \ > MSI_FLAG_NO_AFFINITY) Can confirm that. > I have no immediate idea about the lockdep warn, I don't see how the > MSI_FLAG_PCI_MSI_MASK_PARENT flag can be related to that. Probably there'= s > another problem, let me stare at it.. Seems to go away as well, perhaps it's due to taking some wrong path with the flag just prior to the crash? IOW, works for me with the above change with no crash and no lockdep warning either. johannes