From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C041CC43381 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 08:35:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D02E20878 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 08:35:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1550824527; bh=42Q6v6adkjsM1S1KhYN12ONJAjHAd128nEHMnureLLE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=q1JMrp2Vgw9ZBLadlxqv532ioj+iukiYks6yFnbxLABk1K5/R4roR/nnEugb2G14W XPdOz8DWxtyzMy2Dn+ZC1aoJORma0qddMgK0ijQgIqQt/9ULwWMcBNKCszKlfawRsS EsdQDYCfP8ALdkkELiOay7T9fTzAUpHY99IZL0Vk= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726458AbfBVIf1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Feb 2019 03:35:27 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:36524 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726272AbfBVIf0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Feb 2019 03:35:26 -0500 Received: from localhost (5356596B.cm-6-7b.dynamic.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D8FDE207E0; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 08:35:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1550824526; bh=42Q6v6adkjsM1S1KhYN12ONJAjHAd128nEHMnureLLE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Bnqz0gKeufhk27WZDblpEg/f+AKwTjJctLGJPtSPQMzLZ+Ox2XNgySeDxT6ygUHB1 LMK53J0MCASaUh9CKlzqb5SY+DogWot0UJJqjYoahTNmldrRMDC0m58RyN0lsCJL00 5NDX7vKiPX/ZDRzrDrxXk84E7K0JGQATZAySytQs= Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:35:22 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Gao Xiang Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, Chao Yu , linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, miaoxie@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH for-4.19 00/12] erofs fixes for linux-4.19.y Message-ID: <20190222083522.GB16734@kroah.com> References: <20190220091854.19242-1-gaoxiang25@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190220091854.19242-1-gaoxiang25@huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 05:18:42PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: > This series backports bugfixes already merged in linux upstream > which we found these issues in our commerical products, which > are serious and should be fixed immediately. > > Note that it also includes some xarray modification since > upcoming patches heavily needs it, which can reduce more > conflicts later. > > All patches have been tested again as a whole. Some of these patches are not in 4.20, so if a user were to move to that kernel, they would see a "regression" in the filesystem functionality, right? That's not ok, and because of that reason alone, I can't take this whole series for 4.19.y right now. So can you prepare a set of patches for 4.20.y also with the missing patches you have included here? Also, are all of these really "fixes"? They feel like they are basic "get things working properly" type of patches. The BUG_ONs are not really fixes as no one _should_ be hitting those in a normal system, right? Are they really necessary for systems running 4.19? thanks, greg k-h From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org (Greg Kroah-Hartman) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:35:22 +0100 Subject: [PATCH for-4.19 00/12] erofs fixes for linux-4.19.y In-Reply-To: <20190220091854.19242-1-gaoxiang25@huawei.com> References: <20190220091854.19242-1-gaoxiang25@huawei.com> Message-ID: <20190222083522.GB16734@kroah.com> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019@05:18:42PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: > This series backports bugfixes already merged in linux upstream > which we found these issues in our commerical products, which > are serious and should be fixed immediately. > > Note that it also includes some xarray modification since > upcoming patches heavily needs it, which can reduce more > conflicts later. > > All patches have been tested again as a whole. Some of these patches are not in 4.20, so if a user were to move to that kernel, they would see a "regression" in the filesystem functionality, right? That's not ok, and because of that reason alone, I can't take this whole series for 4.19.y right now. So can you prepare a set of patches for 4.20.y also with the missing patches you have included here? Also, are all of these really "fixes"? They feel like they are basic "get things working properly" type of patches. The BUG_ONs are not really fixes as no one _should_ be hitting those in a normal system, right? Are they really necessary for systems running 4.19? thanks, greg k-h