Regression on linux-next (next-20250120)

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 08:08:30AM +0000, Borah, Chaitanya Kumar wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2025 12:55 PM
> > To: Al Viro <viro at zeniv.linux.org.uk>
> > Cc: Borah, Chaitanya Kumar <chaitanya.kumar.borah at intel.com>; intel-
> > gfx at lists.freedesktop.org; intel-xe at lists.freedesktop.org; Kurmi, Suresh
> > Kumar <suresh.kumar.kurmi at intel.com>; Saarinen, Jani
> > <jani.saarinen at intel.com>; linux-fsdevel at vger.kernel.org; Alexander Gordeev
> > <agordeev at linux.ibm.com>
> > Subject: Re: Regression on linux-next (next-20250120)
> > 
> > On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 07:19:37PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 08:13:02AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Both are needed, actually.  Slightly longer term I would rather
> > > > > split full_proxy_{read,write,lseek}() into short and full variant,
> > > > > getting rid of the "check which pointer is non-NULL" and killed
> > > > > the two remaining users of debugfs_real_fops() outside of
> > > > > fs/debugfs/file.c; then we could union these ->..._fops pointers,
> > > > > but until then they need to be initialized.
> > > > >
> > > > > And yes, ->methods obviously needs to be initialized.
> > > > >
> > > > > Al, bloody embarrassed ;-/
> > > >
> > > > No worries, want to send a patch to fix both of these up so we can
> > > > fix up Linus's tree now?
> > >
> > > [PATCH] Fix the missing initializations in __debugfs_file_get()
> > >
> > > both method table pointers in debugfs_fsdata need to be initialized,
> > > obviously, and calculating the bitmap of present methods would also go
> > > better if we start with initialized state.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 41a0ecc0997c "debugfs: get rid of dynamically allocation proxy_ops"
> > > Fucked-up-by: Al Viro <viro at zeniv.linux.org.uk>
> > > Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro at zeniv.linux.org.uk>
> > > ---
> > 
> > Thanks, now queued up.
> 
> We can confirm that this change works.

Wonderful, thanks!