On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 5:13 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 10:17:08PM -0400, Tamir Duberstein wrote:
> > Partially revert commit 6684aba0780d ("XArray: Add extra debugging check
> > to xas_lock and friends"), fixing test failures in check_xa_alloc.
> >
> > Fixes: 6684aba0780d ("XArray: Add extra debugging check to xas_lock and friends")
>
> This doesn't fix anything. The first failure is:
>
> #6 0x0000555555649979 in XAS_INVALID (xas=xas@entry=0x7ffff4a003a0)
> at ../shared/linux/../../../../include/linux/xarray.h:1434
> #7 0x000055555564f545 in check_xas_retry (xa=xa@entry=0x55555591ba00 <array>)
> --Type <RET> for more, q to quit, c to continue without paging--
> at ../../../lib/test_xarray.c:131
> #8 0x0000555555663869 in xarray_checks () at ../../../lib/test_xarray.c:2221
> #9 0x00005555556639ab in xarray_tests () at xarray.c:15
That's not what I see when I boot a kernel with CONFIG_TEST_XARRAY=y.
> That has nothing to do with xa_destroy(). What on earth are you doing?
I'm running the kernel in a VM on arm64. What are you doing?
> Anyway, I'm at LSFMM and it'a Saturday. I shan't be looking at this
> until the 27th. There's clearly no urgency since you're the first one
> to notice in six months.
Sure. I misunderstood the purpose of linux-next, thinking that if a
commit is in there then it will soon head to mainline. I realize now
this isn't the case.
