Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 14 Oct 2022 12:00:31 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/6] IRQ handling patches backport to 4.14 stable | From | "Bhatnagar, Rishabh" <> |
| |
On 10/9/22 10:50 AM, Bhatnagar, Rishabh wrote: > > On 10/6/22 8:07 PM, Herrenschmidt, Benjamin wrote: >> (putting my @amazon.com hat on) >> >> On Sun, 2022-10-02 at 17:30 +0200, Greg KH wrote: >> >> >>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 09:06:45PM +0000, Rishabh Bhatnagar wrote: >>>> This patch series backports a bunch of patches related IRQ handling >>>> with respect to freeing the irq line while IRQ is in flight at CPU >>>> or at the hardware level. >>>> Recently we saw this issue in serial 8250 driver where the IRQ was >>>> being >>>> freed while the irq was in flight or not yet delivered to the CPU. >>>> As a >>>> result the irqchip was going into a wedged state and IRQ was not >>>> getting >>>> delivered to the cpu. These patches helped fixed the issue in 4.14 >>>> kernel. >>> Why is the serial driver freeing an irq while the system is running? >>> Ah, this could happen on a tty hangup, right? >> Right. Rishabh answered that separately. >> >>>> Let us know if more patches need backporting. >>> What hardware platform were these patches tested on to verify they >>> work properly? And why can't they move to 4.19 or newer if they >>> really need this fix? What's preventing that? >>> >>> As Amazon doesn't seem to be testing 4.14.y -rc releases, I find it >>> odd that you all did this backport. Is this a kernel that you all >>> care about? >> These were tested on a collection of EC2 instances, virtual and metal I >> believe (Rishabh, please confirm). > Yes these patches were tested on multiple virt/metal EC2 instances. >> >> Amazon Linux 2 runs 4.14 or 5.10. Unfortunately we still have to >> support customers running the former. >> >> We'll be including these patches in our releases, we thought it would >> be nice to have them in -stable as well for the sake of whoever else >> might be still using this kernel. No huge deal if they don't. >> >> As for testing -rc's, yes, we need to get better at that (and publish >> what we test). Point taken :-) >> >> Cheers, >> Ben. >> Hi Greg
Let us know if you think it would be beneficial to take these backports for 4.14 stable. We can drop this patch set otherwise.
Thanks alot, Rishabh
| |