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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBBF9C00144 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 18:05:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233245AbiHASFH (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Aug 2022 14:05:07 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45276 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233586AbiHASFD (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Aug 2022 14:05:03 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55BA79FCE; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 11:05:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id A198B68AFE; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 20:04:58 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 20:04:58 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Greg KH Cc: Yu Kuai , stable@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de, axboe@kernel.dk, snitzer@redhat.com, dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, yukuai3@huawei.com, yi.zhang@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH stable 5.10 1/3] block: look up holders by bdev Message-ID: <20220801180458.GA17425@lst.de> References: <20220729062356.1663513-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> <20220729062356.1663513-2-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 01:19:09PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > This is very different from the upstream version, and forces the change > onto everyone, not just those who had CONFIG_BLOCK_HOLDER_DEPRECATED > enabled like was done in the main kernel tree. > > Why force this on all and not just use the same option? I'm really worried about backports that are significantly different from the original commit. To the point where if they are so different and we don't have a grave security or data integrity bug I'm really not very much in favor of backporting them at all. 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 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27AB6C19F2B for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 18:05:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1659377112; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post; bh=Ej8yJelt+K6iLXReGNPsUCctjEq3bLU+dDGlyjx37LE=; b=d3kT4Rsy0oQxmDQFLDTydzbuBHeW64V7TCywh+2bGStiIZEut7yEOHLiGNZvkefHttxHZe Y1RRc3Vyj6Jiyir2qtArZPwt3MzODBiB2rhEAdiVmzWOZBA+uI2sD+7DB7jZmHoaKoaETz PoQD6qUjT1gtDh4zxcIsv9zqcAQXH1Q= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-83-Qvm9QN6mPZSWpK7m90qyaA-1; Mon, 01 Aug 2022 14:05:08 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Qvm9QN6mPZSWpK7m90qyaA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B5660811E7A; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 18:05:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm-prod-listman-01.mail-001.prod.us-east-1.aws.redhat.com (unknown [10.30.29.100]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 709891121314; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 18:05:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm-prod-listman-01.mail-001.prod.us-east-1.aws.redhat.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mm-prod-listman-01.mail-001.prod.us-east-1.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 280F11946A4A; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 18:05:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.9]) by mm-prod-listman-01.mail-001.prod.us-east-1.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 750E51946A40 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 18:05:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id 67A78492CA2; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 18:05:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast02.extmail.prod.ext.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.55.18]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 641DB492C3B for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 18:05:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FCAE823F09 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 18:05:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-403-cPVW5ccGOO6ngHSzPaXVYQ-1; Mon, 01 Aug 2022 14:05:02 -0400 X-MC-Unique: cPVW5ccGOO6ngHSzPaXVYQ-1 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id A198B68AFE; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 20:04:58 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 20:04:58 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Greg KH Message-ID: <20220801180458.GA17425@lst.de> References: <20220729062356.1663513-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> <20220729062356.1663513-2-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-Mimecast-Impersonation-Protect: Policy=CLT - Impersonation Protection Definition; Similar Internal Domain=false; Similar Monitored External Domain=false; Custom External Domain=false; Mimecast External Domain=false; Newly Observed Domain=false; Internal User Name=false; Custom Display Name List=false; Reply-to Address Mismatch=false; Targeted Threat Dictionary=false; Mimecast Threat Dictionary=false; Custom Threat Dictionary=false X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.85 on 10.11.54.9 Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH stable 5.10 1/3] block: look up holders by bdev X-BeenThere: dm-devel@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: device-mapper development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, snitzer@redhat.com, yi.zhang@huawei.com, stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Yu Kuai , dm-devel@redhat.com, yukuai3@huawei.com, hch@lst.de Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Sender: "dm-devel" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 10.11.54.3 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 01:19:09PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > This is very different from the upstream version, and forces the change > onto everyone, not just those who had CONFIG_BLOCK_HOLDER_DEPRECATED > enabled like was done in the main kernel tree. > > Why force this on all and not just use the same option? I'm really worried about backports that are significantly different from the original commit. To the point where if they are so different and we don't have a grave security or data integrity bug I'm really not very much in favor of backporting them at all. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel