Thread (43 messages) 43 messages, 5 authors, 2020-07-03

Re: linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected)

From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Date: 2020-06-24 13:17:38
Also in: bridge, keyrings, linux-fsdevel, linux-nfs, linux-s390, lkml, netdev

Martin, your eyeballs would be appreciated for a bit on this.

On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 12:05:46PM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 01:11:54PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
quoted

On 23.06.20 16:23, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
quoted

On 23.06.20 16:11, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
quoted
Jens Markwardt reported a regression in the linux-next runs.  with "umh: fix
processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used" (from linux-next) a linux bridge
with an KVM guests no longer activates :

without patch
# ip addr show dev virbr1
6: virbr1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP group default qlen 1000
    link/ether 52:54:00:1e:3f:c0 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
    inet 192.168.254.254/24 brd 192.168.254.255 scope global virbr1
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

with this patch the bridge stays DOWN with NO-CARRIER

# ip addr show dev virbr1
6: virbr1: <NO-CARRIER,BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state DOWN group default qlen 1000
    link/ether 52:54:00:1e:3f:c0 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
    inet 192.168.254.254/24 brd 192.168.254.255 scope global virbr1
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

This was bisected in linux-next. Reverting from linux-next also fixes the issue.

Any idea?
FWIW, s390 is big endian. Maybe some of the shifts inn the __KW* macros are wrong.
Does anyone have an idea why "umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used" breaks the
linux-bridge on s390?
glibc for instance defines __WEXITSTATUS in only one location: bits/waitstatus.h
and it does not special case it per architecture, so at this point I'd
have to say we have to look somewhere else for why this is happening.
I found however an LTP bug indicating the need to test for
s390 wait macros [0] in light of a recent bug in glibc for s390.
I am asking for references to that issue given I cannot find
any mention of this on glibc yet.

I'm in hopes Martin might be aware of that mentioned s390 glic bug.

[0] https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/issues/605

  Luis
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help