This repo is missing a LICENSE file #4
Comments
chris-oo
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 8, 2024
[ Upstream commit fc3a553 ] An issue occurred while reading an ELF file in libbpf.c during fuzzing: Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x0000000000958e97 in bpf_object.collect_prog_relos () at libbpf.c:4206 4206 in libbpf.c (gdb) bt #0 0x0000000000958e97 in bpf_object.collect_prog_relos () at libbpf.c:4206 #1 0x000000000094f9d6 in bpf_object.collect_relos () at libbpf.c:6706 #2 0x000000000092bef3 in bpf_object_open () at libbpf.c:7437 #3 0x000000000092c046 in bpf_object.open_mem () at libbpf.c:7497 #4 0x0000000000924afa in LLVMFuzzerTestOneInput () at fuzz/bpf-object-fuzzer.c:16 #5 0x000000000060be11 in testblitz_engine::fuzzer::Fuzzer::run_one () #6 0x000000000087ad92 in tracing::span::Span::in_scope () #7 0x00000000006078aa in testblitz_engine::fuzzer::util::walkdir () #8 0x00000000005f3217 in testblitz_engine::entrypoint::main::{{closure}} () #9 0x00000000005f2601 in main () (gdb) scn_data was null at this code(tools/lib/bpf/src/libbpf.c): if (rel->r_offset % BPF_INSN_SZ || rel->r_offset >= scn_data->d_size) { The scn_data is derived from the code above: scn = elf_sec_by_idx(obj, sec_idx); scn_data = elf_sec_data(obj, scn); relo_sec_name = elf_sec_str(obj, shdr->sh_name); sec_name = elf_sec_name(obj, scn); if (!relo_sec_name || !sec_name)// don't check whether scn_data is NULL return -EINVAL; In certain special scenarios, such as reading a malformed ELF file, it is possible that scn_data may be a null pointer Signed-off-by: Mingyi Zhang <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Xin Liu <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Changye Wu <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
chris-oo
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 8, 2024
Currently for DeviceTree bootup, x86 code does the default mapping of CPUs to NUMA, which is wrong. This can cause WARN like below: [0.417551] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [0.417551] Saurabh sched: CPU #1's smt-sibling CPU #0 is not on the same node! [node: 1 != 0]. Ignoring dependency. [0.417551] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 0 at topology_sane.isra.0+0x5c/0x6d [0.417551] Modules linked in: [0.417551] CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Not tainted 6.1.71-microsoft-hcl+ #4 [0.417551] RIP: 0010:topology_sane.isra.0+0x5c/0x6d [0.417551] Code: 41 39 dc 74 27 80 3d 32 ae 2d 00 00 75 1e 41 89 d9 45 89 e0 44 89 d6 48 c7 c7 00 a6 4a 88 c6 05 19 ae 2d 00 01 e8 6e 1f cb ff <0f> 0b 41 39 dc 5b 41 5c 0f 94 c0 5d c3 cc cc cc cc 55 48 8b 05 05 [0.417551] RSP: 0000:ffffc9000013feb0 EFLAGS: 00010086 [0.417551] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 0000000000000000 [0.417551] RDX: 0000000000000003 RSI: 0000000000000086 RDI: 00000000ffffffff [0.417551] RBP: ffffc9000013fec0 R08: ffffffff88778160 R09: ffffffff88778160 [0.417551] R10: ffff888227fe26da R11: ffff888227fe26c1 R12: 0000000000000001 [0.417551] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: ffff888216415040 R15: 0000000000000000 [0.417551] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff888216400000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [0.417551] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [0.417551] CR2: 0000000000000000 CR3: 0000000208809001 CR4: 0000000000330ea0 [0.417551] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 [0.417551] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe07f0 DR7: 0000000000000400 [0.417551] Call Trace: [0.417551] <TASK> [0.417551] ? show_regs.cold+0x1a/0x1f [0.417551] ? __warn+0x6e/0xc0 [0.417551] ? report_bug+0x101/0x1a0 [0.417551] ? handle_bug+0x40/0x70 [0.417551] ? exc_invalid_op+0x19/0x70 [0.417551] ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1b/0x20 [0.417551] ? topology_sane.isra.0+0x5c/0x6d [0.417551] match_smt+0xf6/0xfc [0.417551] set_cpu_sibling_map.cold+0x24f/0x512 [0.417551] start_secondary+0x5c/0x110 [0.417551] secondary_startup_64_no_verify+0xcd/0xdb [0.417551] </TASK> [0.417551] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- Add the correct mapping of CPUs to NUMA node as per DeviceTree to fix this issue. Signed-off-by: Saurabh Sengar <[email protected]>
|
You are not allowed to close this issue, merge pull request for missing files. Following file(s) are missing:license((-|_)([a-z0-9]))(.[-_a-z0-9]+)* Total execution time: 3.24 seconds |
allenpais
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Sep 26, 2024
[ Upstream commit b313a8c835516bdda85025500be866ac8a74e022 ] Lockdep reported a warning in Linux version 6.6: [ 414.344659] ================================ [ 414.345155] WARNING: inconsistent lock state [ 414.345658] 6.6.0-07439-gba2303cacfda #6 Not tainted [ 414.346221] -------------------------------- [ 414.346712] inconsistent {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} -> {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} usage. [ 414.347545] kworker/u10:3/1152 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] takes: [ 414.349245] ffff88810edd1098 (&sbq->ws[i].wait){+.?.}-{2:2}, at: blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list+0x131c/0x1ee0 [ 414.351204] {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} state was registered at: [ 414.351751] lock_acquire+0x18d/0x460 [ 414.352218] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x39/0x60 [ 414.352769] __wake_up_common_lock+0x22/0x60 [ 414.353289] sbitmap_queue_wake_up+0x375/0x4f0 [ 414.353829] sbitmap_queue_clear+0xdd/0x270 [ 414.354338] blk_mq_put_tag+0xdf/0x170 [ 414.354807] __blk_mq_free_request+0x381/0x4d0 [ 414.355335] blk_mq_free_request+0x28b/0x3e0 [ 414.355847] __blk_mq_end_request+0x242/0xc30 [ 414.356367] scsi_end_request+0x2c1/0x830 [ 414.345155] WARNING: inconsistent lock state [ 414.345658] 6.6.0-07439-gba2303cacfda #6 Not tainted [ 414.346221] -------------------------------- [ 414.346712] inconsistent {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} -> {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} usage. [ 414.347545] kworker/u10:3/1152 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] takes: [ 414.349245] ffff88810edd1098 (&sbq->ws[i].wait){+.?.}-{2:2}, at: blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list+0x131c/0x1ee0 [ 414.351204] {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} state was registered at: [ 414.351751] lock_acquire+0x18d/0x460 [ 414.352218] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x39/0x60 [ 414.352769] __wake_up_common_lock+0x22/0x60 [ 414.353289] sbitmap_queue_wake_up+0x375/0x4f0 [ 414.353829] sbitmap_queue_clear+0xdd/0x270 [ 414.354338] blk_mq_put_tag+0xdf/0x170 [ 414.354807] __blk_mq_free_request+0x381/0x4d0 [ 414.355335] blk_mq_free_request+0x28b/0x3e0 [ 414.355847] __blk_mq_end_request+0x242/0xc30 [ 414.356367] scsi_end_request+0x2c1/0x830 [ 414.356863] scsi_io_completion+0x177/0x1610 [ 414.357379] scsi_complete+0x12f/0x260 [ 414.357856] blk_complete_reqs+0xba/0xf0 [ 414.358338] __do_softirq+0x1b0/0x7a2 [ 414.358796] irq_exit_rcu+0x14b/0x1a0 [ 414.359262] sysvec_call_function_single+0xaf/0xc0 [ 414.359828] asm_sysvec_call_function_single+0x1a/0x20 [ 414.360426] default_idle+0x1e/0x30 [ 414.360873] default_idle_call+0x9b/0x1f0 [ 414.361390] do_idle+0x2d2/0x3e0 [ 414.361819] cpu_startup_entry+0x55/0x60 [ 414.362314] start_secondary+0x235/0x2b0 [ 414.362809] secondary_startup_64_no_verify+0x18f/0x19b [ 414.363413] irq event stamp: 428794 [ 414.363825] hardirqs last enabled at (428793): [<ffffffff816bfd1c>] ktime_get+0x1dc/0x200 [ 414.364694] hardirqs last disabled at (428794): [<ffffffff85470177>] _raw_spin_lock_irq+0x47/0x50 [ 414.365629] softirqs last enabled at (428444): [<ffffffff85474780>] __do_softirq+0x540/0x7a2 [ 414.366522] softirqs last disabled at (428419): [<ffffffff813f65ab>] irq_exit_rcu+0x14b/0x1a0 [ 414.367425] other info that might help us debug this: [ 414.368194] Possible unsafe locking scenario: [ 414.368900] CPU0 [ 414.369225] ---- [ 414.369548] lock(&sbq->ws[i].wait); [ 414.370000] <Interrupt> [ 414.370342] lock(&sbq->ws[i].wait); [ 414.370802] *** DEADLOCK *** [ 414.371569] 5 locks held by kworker/u10:3/1152: [ 414.372088] #0: ffff88810130e938 ((wq_completion)writeback){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_scheduled_works+0x357/0x13f0 [ 414.373180] #1: ffff88810201fdb8 ((work_completion)(&(&wb->dwork)->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_scheduled_works+0x3a3/0x13f0 [ 414.374384] #2: ffffffff86ffbdc0 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0x637/0xa00 [ 414.375342] #3: ffff88810edd1098 (&sbq->ws[i].wait){+.?.}-{2:2}, at: blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list+0x131c/0x1ee0 [ 414.376377] #4: ffff888106205a08 (&hctx->dispatch_wait_lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list+0x1337/0x1ee0 [ 414.378607] stack backtrace: [ 414.379177] CPU: 0 PID: 1152 Comm: kworker/u10:3 Not tainted 6.6.0-07439-gba2303cacfda #6 [ 414.380032] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a1990b-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 [ 414.381177] Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn (flush-253:0) [ 414.381805] Call Trace: [ 414.382136] <TASK> [ 414.382429] dump_stack_lvl+0x91/0xf0 [ 414.382884] mark_lock_irq+0xb3b/0x1260 [ 414.383367] ? __pfx_mark_lock_irq+0x10/0x10 [ 414.383889] ? stack_trace_save+0x8e/0xc0 [ 414.384373] ? __pfx_stack_trace_save+0x10/0x10 [ 414.384903] ? graph_lock+0xcf/0x410 [ 414.385350] ? save_trace+0x3d/0xc70 [ 414.385808] mark_lock.part.20+0x56d/0xa90 [ 414.386317] mark_held_locks+0xb0/0x110 [ 414.386791] ? __pfx_do_raw_spin_lock+0x10/0x10 [ 414.387320] lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x297/0x3f0 [ 414.387901] ? _raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x28/0x50 [ 414.388422] trace_hardirqs_on+0x58/0x100 [ 414.388917] _raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x28/0x50 [ 414.389422] __blk_mq_tag_busy+0x1d6/0x2a0 [ 414.389920] __blk_mq_get_driver_tag+0x761/0x9f0 [ 414.390899] blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list+0x1780/0x1ee0 [ 414.391473] ? __pfx_blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list+0x10/0x10 [ 414.392070] ? sbitmap_get+0x2b8/0x450 [ 414.392533] ? __blk_mq_get_driver_tag+0x210/0x9f0 [ 414.393095] __blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0xd99/0x1690 [ 414.393730] ? elv_attempt_insert_merge+0x1b1/0x420 [ 414.394302] ? __pfx___blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0x10/0x10 [ 414.394970] ? lock_acquire+0x18d/0x460 [ 414.395456] ? blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0x637/0xa00 [ 414.395986] ? __pfx_lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 [ 414.396499] blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0x109/0x190 [ 414.397100] blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0x66e/0xa00 [ 414.397616] blk_mq_flush_plug_list.part.17+0x614/0x2030 [ 414.398244] ? __pfx_blk_mq_flush_plug_list.part.17+0x10/0x10 [ 414.398897] ? writeback_sb_inodes+0x241/0xcc0 [ 414.399429] blk_mq_flush_plug_list+0x65/0x80 [ 414.399957] __blk_flush_plug+0x2f1/0x530 [ 414.400458] ? __pfx___blk_flush_plug+0x10/0x10 [ 414.400999] blk_finish_plug+0x59/0xa0 [ 414.401467] wb_writeback+0x7cc/0x920 [ 414.401935] ? __pfx_wb_writeback+0x10/0x10 [ 414.402442] ? mark_held_locks+0xb0/0x110 [ 414.402931] ? __pfx_do_raw_spin_lock+0x10/0x10 [ 414.403462] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x297/0x3f0 [ 414.404062] wb_workfn+0x2b3/0xcf0 [ 414.404500] ? __pfx_wb_workfn+0x10/0x10 [ 414.404989] process_scheduled_works+0x432/0x13f0 [ 414.405546] ? __pfx_process_scheduled_works+0x10/0x10 [ 414.406139] ? do_raw_spin_lock+0x101/0x2a0 [ 414.406641] ? assign_work+0x19b/0x240 [ 414.407106] ? lock_is_held_type+0x9d/0x110 [ 414.407604] worker_thread+0x6f2/0x1160 [ 414.408075] ? __kthread_parkme+0x62/0x210 [ 414.408572] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x297/0x3f0 [ 414.409168] ? __kthread_parkme+0x13c/0x210 [ 414.409678] ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 [ 414.410191] kthread+0x33c/0x440 [ 414.410602] ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 [ 414.411068] ret_from_fork+0x4d/0x80 [ 414.411526] ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 [ 414.411993] ret_from_fork_asm+0x1b/0x30 [ 414.412489] </TASK> When interrupt is turned on while a lock holding by spin_lock_irq it throws a warning because of potential deadlock. blk_mq_prep_dispatch_rq blk_mq_get_driver_tag __blk_mq_get_driver_tag __blk_mq_alloc_driver_tag blk_mq_tag_busy -> tag is already busy // failed to get driver tag blk_mq_mark_tag_wait spin_lock_irq(&wq->lock) -> lock A (&sbq->ws[i].wait) __add_wait_queue(wq, wait) -> wait queue active blk_mq_get_driver_tag __blk_mq_tag_busy -> 1) tag must be idle, which means there can't be inflight IO spin_lock_irq(&tags->lock) -> lock B (hctx->tags) spin_unlock_irq(&tags->lock) -> unlock B, turn on interrupt accidentally -> 2) context must be preempt by IO interrupt to trigger deadlock. As shown above, the deadlock is not possible in theory, but the warning still need to be fixed. Fix it by using spin_lock_irqsave to get lockB instead of spin_lock_irq. Fixes: 4f1731d ("blk-mq: fix potential io hang by wrong 'wake_batch'") Signed-off-by: Li Lingfeng <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Ming Lei <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Yu Kuai <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
allenpais
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Sep 26, 2024
[ Upstream commit c3a5e3e ] When using cachefiles, lockdep may emit something similar to the circular locking dependency notice below. The problem appears to stem from the following: (1) Cachefiles manipulates xattrs on the files in its cache when called from ->writepages(). (2) The setxattr() and removexattr() system call handlers get the name (and value) from userspace after taking the sb_writers lock, putting accesses of the vma->vm_lock and mm->mmap_lock inside of that. (3) The afs filesystem uses a per-inode lock to prevent multiple revalidation RPCs and in writeback vs truncate to prevent parallel operations from deadlocking against the server on one side and local page locks on the other. Fix this by moving the getting of the name and value in {get,remove}xattr() outside of the sb_writers lock. This also has the minor benefits that we don't need to reget these in the event of a retry and we never try to take the sb_writers lock in the event we can't pull the name and value into the kernel. Alternative approaches that might fix this include moving the dispatch of a write to the cache off to a workqueue or trying to do without the validation lock in afs. Note that this might also affect other filesystems that use netfslib and/or cachefiles. ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 6.10.0-build2+ #956 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ fsstress/6050 is trying to acquire lock: ffff888138fd82f0 (mapping.invalidate_lock#3){++++}-{3:3}, at: filemap_fault+0x26e/0x8b0 but task is already holding lock: ffff888113f26d18 (&vma->vm_lock->lock){++++}-{3:3}, at: lock_vma_under_rcu+0x165/0x250 which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #4 (&vma->vm_lock->lock){++++}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0xaf0/0xd80 lock_acquire.part.0+0x103/0x280 down_write+0x3b/0x50 vma_start_write+0x6b/0xa0 vma_link+0xcc/0x140 insert_vm_struct+0xb7/0xf0 alloc_bprm+0x2c1/0x390 kernel_execve+0x65/0x1a0 call_usermodehelper_exec_async+0x14d/0x190 ret_from_fork+0x24/0x40 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 -> #3 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0xaf0/0xd80 lock_acquire.part.0+0x103/0x280 __might_fault+0x7c/0xb0 strncpy_from_user+0x25/0x160 removexattr+0x7f/0x100 __do_sys_fremovexattr+0x7e/0xb0 do_syscall_64+0x9f/0x100 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e -> #2 (sb_writers#14){.+.+}-{0:0}: __lock_acquire+0xaf0/0xd80 lock_acquire.part.0+0x103/0x280 percpu_down_read+0x3c/0x90 vfs_iocb_iter_write+0xe9/0x1d0 __cachefiles_write+0x367/0x430 cachefiles_issue_write+0x299/0x2f0 netfs_advance_write+0x117/0x140 netfs_write_folio.isra.0+0x5ca/0x6e0 netfs_writepages+0x230/0x2f0 afs_writepages+0x4d/0x70 do_writepages+0x1e8/0x3e0 filemap_fdatawrite_wbc+0x84/0xa0 __filemap_fdatawrite_range+0xa8/0xf0 file_write_and_wait_range+0x59/0x90 afs_release+0x10f/0x270 __fput+0x25f/0x3d0 __do_sys_close+0x43/0x70 do_syscall_64+0x9f/0x100 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e -> #1 (&vnode->validate_lock){++++}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0xaf0/0xd80 lock_acquire.part.0+0x103/0x280 down_read+0x95/0x200 afs_writepages+0x37/0x70 do_writepages+0x1e8/0x3e0 filemap_fdatawrite_wbc+0x84/0xa0 filemap_invalidate_inode+0x167/0x1e0 netfs_unbuffered_write_iter+0x1bd/0x2d0 vfs_write+0x22e/0x320 ksys_write+0xbc/0x130 do_syscall_64+0x9f/0x100 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e -> #0 (mapping.invalidate_lock#3){++++}-{3:3}: check_noncircular+0x119/0x160 check_prev_add+0x195/0x430 __lock_acquire+0xaf0/0xd80 lock_acquire.part.0+0x103/0x280 down_read+0x95/0x200 filemap_fault+0x26e/0x8b0 __do_fault+0x57/0xd0 do_pte_missing+0x23b/0x320 __handle_mm_fault+0x2d4/0x320 handle_mm_fault+0x14f/0x260 do_user_addr_fault+0x2a2/0x500 exc_page_fault+0x71/0x90 asm_exc_page_fault+0x22/0x30 other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: mapping.invalidate_lock#3 --> &mm->mmap_lock --> &vma->vm_lock->lock Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- rlock(&vma->vm_lock->lock); lock(&mm->mmap_lock); lock(&vma->vm_lock->lock); rlock(mapping.invalidate_lock#3); *** DEADLOCK *** 1 lock held by fsstress/6050: #0: ffff888113f26d18 (&vma->vm_lock->lock){++++}-{3:3}, at: lock_vma_under_rcu+0x165/0x250 stack backtrace: CPU: 0 PID: 6050 Comm: fsstress Not tainted 6.10.0-build2+ #956 Hardware name: ASUS All Series/H97-PLUS, BIOS 2306 10/09/2014 Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x57/0x80 check_noncircular+0x119/0x160 ? queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x4be/0x510 ? __pfx_check_noncircular+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x10/0x10 ? mark_lock+0x47/0x160 ? init_chain_block+0x9c/0xc0 ? add_chain_block+0x84/0xf0 check_prev_add+0x195/0x430 __lock_acquire+0xaf0/0xd80 ? __pfx___lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 ? __lock_release.isra.0+0x13b/0x230 lock_acquire.part.0+0x103/0x280 ? filemap_fault+0x26e/0x8b0 ? __pfx_lock_acquire.part.0+0x10/0x10 ? rcu_is_watching+0x34/0x60 ? lock_acquire+0xd7/0x120 down_read+0x95/0x200 ? filemap_fault+0x26e/0x8b0 ? __pfx_down_read+0x10/0x10 ? __filemap_get_folio+0x25/0x1a0 filemap_fault+0x26e/0x8b0 ? __pfx_filemap_fault+0x10/0x10 ? find_held_lock+0x7c/0x90 ? __pfx___lock_release.isra.0+0x10/0x10 ? __pte_offset_map+0x99/0x110 __do_fault+0x57/0xd0 do_pte_missing+0x23b/0x320 __handle_mm_fault+0x2d4/0x320 ? __pfx___handle_mm_fault+0x10/0x10 handle_mm_fault+0x14f/0x260 do_user_addr_fault+0x2a2/0x500 exc_page_fault+0x71/0x90 asm_exc_page_fault+0x22/0x30 Signed-off-by: David Howells <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] cc: Alexander Viro <[email protected]> cc: Christian Brauner <[email protected]> cc: Jan Kara <[email protected]> cc: Jeff Layton <[email protected]> cc: Gao Xiang <[email protected]> cc: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]> cc: [email protected] cc: [email protected] cc: [email protected] [brauner: fix minor issues] Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
This repository is currently missing a LICENSE file.
A license helps users understand how to use your project in a compliant manner. You can find the standard MIT license Microsoft uses at: https://github.com/microsoft/repo-templates/blob/main/shared/LICENSE.
If you would like to learn more about open source licenses, please visit the document at https://aka.ms/license (Microsoft-internal guidance).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: