[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-bcache
Subject:    Re: bcache: for-next unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000019
From:       Coly Li <i () coly ! li>
Date:       2017-10-25 14:05:17
Message-ID: 9cb58a34-8ada-b9dd-7abb-188379e63b59 () coly ! li
[Download RAW message or body]

On 2017/10/25 下午9:26, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
[snip]
>>>> Hi Stefan,
>>>>
>>>> In code path of closure_wake_up(), I remember there are two patches in
>>>> last run,
>>>> - commit a5f3d8a5eaaf ("bcache: use llist_for_each_entry_safe() in
>>>> __closure_wake_up()")
>>>> - commit 09b3efec81de ("bcache: Don't reinvent the wheel but use
>>>> existing llist API")
>>>>
>>>> Can you check whether you have all of these patches ? Or can we try to
>>>> revoke these two patches and see whether oops still happens.
>>>
>>> It seems i'm missing a5f3d8a5eaaf but i have 09b3efec81de.
>>>
>>> I missed it because
>>> git log ..linux-block/for-next -- drivers/md/bcache/
>>>
>>> does not show it. It seems linux-block/for-next does not contain it?
>>> Which branch should i use?
>>>
>>> Only those contain the mentioned commit:
>>>   remotes/linux-block/for-linus
>>>   remotes/linux-block/master
>>>   remotes/linux-block/wbt-odirect
>>>
>>
>> Hi Stefan,
>>
>> These 2 patches are in 4.14 mainline kernel already. This is my fault to
>> make commit 09b3efec81de buggy, and fix it in commit a5f3d8a5eaaf.
>>
>> Could you please try again with the fixing patch ?
>>
>> (And I guess maybe other 2 reports may also miss this fix).
> 
> OK indeed it seems it fixed it. Sorry about that.
> 

Hi Stefan,

Thanks for the confirm :-)

-- 
Coly Li
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]