Xen devel - Sep 2012 - [PATCH] tmem: fixup 2010 cleanup patch that breaks tmem save/restore

20918:a3fa6d444b25 "Fix domain reference leaks" (in Feb 2010, by Jan)
does some cleanup in addition to the leak fixes.  Unfortunately, that
cleanup inadvertently resulted in an incorrect fallthrough in a switch
statement which breaks tmem save/restore.

That broken patch was apparently applied to 4.0-testing and 4.1-testing
so those are broken as well.

What is the process now for requesting back-patches to 4.0 and 4.1?

(Side note: This does not by itself entirely fix save/restore in 4.2.)

Signed-off-by: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>

diff -r 1dfbae8dd282 xen/common/tmem.c
--- a/xen/common/tmem.c	Fri Aug 31 11:13:49 2012 +0100
+++ b/xen/common/tmem.c	Tue Sep 04 15:17:29 2012 -0600
@@ -2404,6 +2404,7 @@ static NOINLINE int tmemc_save_subop(int
         *uuid++ = pool->uuid[0];
         *uuid = pool->uuid[1];
         rc = 0;
+        break;
     case TMEMC_SAVE_END:
         client->live_migrating = 0;
         if ( !list_empty(&client->persistent_invalidated_list) )
@@ -2412,6 +2413,7 @@ static NOINLINE int tmemc_save_subop(int
                 pgp_free_from_inv_list(client,pgp);
         client->frozen = client->was_frozen;
         rc = 0;
+        break;
     }
     return rc;
 }


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

>>> On 04.09.12 at 23:25, Dan Magenheimer
<dan.magenheimer@oracle.com> wrote:
> 20918:a3fa6d444b25 "Fix domain reference leaks" (in Feb 2010, by
Jan)
> does some cleanup in addition to the leak fixes.  Unfortunately, that
> cleanup inadvertently resulted in an incorrect fallthrough in a switch
> statement which breaks tmem save/restore.
Oh, I''m sorry for that. We had spotted these missing breaks in
the course of the XSA-15 investigations too, so I''m having a
similar patch pending (deferred its posting until after the
publishing of that advisory). I''d prefer the security ones to go in
first, and this one (or mine, which has some more cleanup in it)
on top. If it''s going to be yours, then it would need re-basing, as
the security patches will break the context of the first hunk.
> That broken patch was apparently applied to 4.0-testing and 4.1-testing
> so those are broken as well.
The patch actually went in before 4.0.0-rc3, i.e. before
4.0-testing got branched off.
> What is the process now for requesting back-patches to 4.0 and 4.1?
Unless someone steps up to maintain the 4.0 tree, it''ll be
considered dead with the release of 4.2.

For 4.1, I''ll be making sure to apply it there too once it comes
through the unstable stage testing.
> (Side note: This does not by itself entirely fix save/restore in 4.2.)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>
With the above, in any case

Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

Jan
> diff -r 1dfbae8dd282 xen/common/tmem.c
> --- a/xen/common/tmem.c	Fri Aug 31 11:13:49 2012 +0100
> +++ b/xen/common/tmem.c	Tue Sep 04 15:17:29 2012 -0600
> @@ -2404,6 +2404,7 @@ static NOINLINE int tmemc_save_subop(int
>          *uuid++ = pool->uuid[0];
>          *uuid = pool->uuid[1];
>          rc = 0;
> +        break;
>      case TMEMC_SAVE_END:
>          client->live_migrating = 0;
>          if ( !list_empty(&client->persistent_invalidated_list) )
> @@ -2412,6 +2413,7 @@ static NOINLINE int tmemc_save_subop(int
>                  pgp_free_from_inv_list(client,pgp);
>          client->frozen = client->was_frozen;
>          rc = 0;
> +        break;
>      }
>      return rc;
>  }