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=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 BF7CDC3A5A7 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 21:30:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0E532339D for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 21:30:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726907AbfICVar (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Sep 2019 17:30:47 -0400 Received: from outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu ([18.9.28.11]:47681 "EHLO outgoing.mit.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726179AbfICVaq (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Sep 2019 17:30:46 -0400 Received: from callcc.thunk.org (guestnat-104-133-0-96.corp.google.com [104.133.0.96] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id x83LUUn0009589 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 3 Sep 2019 17:30:32 -0400 Received: by callcc.thunk.org (Postfix, from userid 15806) id 3341E42049E; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 17:30:30 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 17:30:30 -0400 From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Al Viro , Qian Cai , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, LKML Subject: Re: "fs/namei.c: keep track of nd->root refcount status" causes boot panic Message-ID: <20190903213030.GE2899@mit.edu> References: <7C6CCE98-1E22-433C-BF70-A3CBCDED4635@lca.pw> <20190903123719.GF1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20190903130456.GA9567@infradead.org> <20190903134832.GH1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20190903135024.GA8274@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190903135024.GA8274@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 06:50:24AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 02:48:32PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > > Not sure what would be the best way to do it... I don't mind breaking > > the out-of-tree modules, whatever their license is; what I would rather > > avoid is _quiet_ breaking of such. > > Any out of tree module running against an upstream kernel will need > a recompile for a new version anyway. So I would not worry about it > at all. I'm really confused. What out-of-tree module are people needing to use when doing linux-next testing? That seems like a recipe for disaster... - Ted