[Intel-gfx] [v5 PATCH 2/2] fuse: share lookup state between submount and its parent

final lookup of the fuse nodeid. Signed-off-by: Krister Johansen Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org Fixes: 1866d779d5d2 ("fuse: Allow fuse_fill_super_common() for submounts") --- Changes since v4: - Ensure that submount_lookup is NULL initialized in fuse_alloc_inode. (Feedback from Nares

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] fuse: ensure submount_lookup is initialized on alloc

When introduced, the submount lookup reference tracking neglected to set an initial value in the fuse inode as part of fuse_inode_alloc. Users running with SLUB_DEBUG enabled caught and reported this error. Fix by ensuring that this value is always initialized to NULL. Signed-off-by: Krister

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/2] Fuse submount_lookup needs to be initialized

Hi Miklos, I got a couple of bug reports[1][2] this morning from teams that are tracking regresssions in linux-next. My patch 513dfacefd71 ("fuse: share lookup state between submount and its parent") is causing panics in the fuse unmount path. The reports came from users with SLUB_DEBUG enabled,

Re: [Intel-gfx] Regression on linux-next (next-20231107)

After bisecting the tree, the following patch [4] seems to be the first "bad" > commit > > > ` > 513dfacefd712bcbfab64e1a9c9c3e0d51c2dca5 is the first bad commit > commit 513dfacefd712bcbfab64e1a9c9c3e0d51c2dca5 > Author: Krister Johansen k...