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

Luis Chamberlain mcgrof at kernel.org
Wed Jul 1 13:53:27 UTC 2020


On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 10:24:29PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2020/07/01 19:08, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 30.06.20 19:57, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 02:54:10AM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 08:37:55PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 24.06.20 20:32, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>>> [...]> 
> >>>>> So the translations look correct. But your change is actually a sematic change
> >>>>> if(ret) will only trigger if there is an error
> >>>>> if (KWIFEXITED(ret)) will always trigger when the process ends. So we will always overwrite -ECHILD
> >>>>> and we did not do it before. 
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> So the right fix is
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
> >>>> index f81e8698e36e..a3a3196e84d1 100644
> >>>> --- a/kernel/umh.c
> >>>> +++ b/kernel/umh.c
> >>>> @@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ static void call_usermodehelper_exec_sync(struct subprocess_info *sub_info)
> >>>>                  * the real error code is already in sub_info->retval or
> >>>>                  * sub_info->retval is 0 anyway, so don't mess with it then.
> >>>>                  */
> >>>> -               if (KWIFEXITED(ret))
> >>>> +               if (KWEXITSTATUS(ret))
> >>>>                         sub_info->retval = KWEXITSTATUS(ret);
> 
> Well, it is not br_stp_call_user() but br_stp_start() which is expecting
> to set sub_info->retval for both KWIFEXITED() case and KWIFSIGNALED() case.
> That is, sub_info->retval needs to carry raw value (i.e. without "umh: fix
> processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used" will be the correct behavior).

br_stp_start() doesn't check for the raw value, it just checks for err
or !err. So the patch, "umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is
used" propagates the correct error now.

Christian, can you try removing the binary temporarily and seeing if
you get your bridge working?

  Luis


More information about the Bridge mailing list