From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756762Ab3EVUEn (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2013 16:04:43 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:41490 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756637Ab3EVUEk (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2013 16:04:40 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 13:04:39 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Smart Weblications GmbH - Florian Wiessner Cc: davem@davemloft.net, liquidhorse@gmail.com, andy@greyhouse.net, fubar@us.ibm.com, LKML , stable@vger.kernel.org, nikolay@redhat.com, vfalico@redhat.com Subject: Re: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/2/1/531 Message-ID: <20130522200439.GA21367@kroah.com> References: <519CADA9.9060909@smart-weblications.de> <20130522135745.GA14640@kroah.com> <519CEF4B.5090108@smart-weblications.de> <20130522162336.GA5761@kroah.com> <519D0B79.6010307@smart-weblications.de> <20130522190640.GA20276@kroah.com> <519D1DEF.8090206@smart-weblications.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <519D1DEF.8090206@smart-weblications.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 09:35:11PM +0200, Smart Weblications GmbH - Florian Wiessner wrote: > Hi Greg, > > Am 22.05.2013 21:06, schrieb Greg KH:> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 08:16:25PM +0200, > Smart Weblications GmbH - Florian Wiessner wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> > >> Am 22.05.2013 18:23, schrieb Greg KH: > >>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 06:16:11PM +0200, Smart Weblications GmbH - Florian > Wiessner wrote: > >>>> Am 22.05.2013 15:57, schrieb Greg KH: > >>>>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 01:36:09PM +0200, Smart Weblications GmbH - > Florian Wiessner wrote: > >>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> why is this patch still not backported to 3.4? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I today tried 3.4.46 from kernel.org, but the patch STILL seems _NOT_ > included? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> WHY IS THAT? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the > >>>>> stable kernel tree. Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt > >>>>> for how to do this properly. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I don't want to submit a patch - i wanted to know why this patch still is > not in > >>>> the kernel (it is afaics at least 6 months old!) > >>> > >>> Perhaps because it was not submitted properly as documented above? > >>> > >> > >> Well, i don't know. I have not written that patch, but tested and applied it > >> against 3.4.36 where it worked fine. > >> > >> But i am unable to apply it to 3.4.46 (there are rejects if i try to apply it, > >> obviously because there were changes in the meanwhile) - It would be cool if > >> someone could tell if that patch is really needed anymore with 3.4.46. > >> > >> I am no C coder and only have little C experience, but i'd like to use this > >> patch with current 3.4 stable Kernel or at least make sure that this patch is > >> not needed anymore with current stable kernels... > > > > Why do you think that it is needed? And does it match up to a specific > > change that is already in Linus's tree? That is a requirement here. > > > > It is needed, because without it (at least in 3.4.36) virtualized guests > (kvm/qemu) are unable to use br0 (bridge) if the bridge uses a bond with mode 6 > (balance-alb). > > https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jkirsher/net-next/+/567b871e503316b0927e54a3d7c86d50b722d955%5E!/ Ok, that's what we need. Now, please cc: the developers / maintainers of that patch and ask them to have it included in the 3.4-stable kernel series. Then, if they agree, the network maintainer will pick it up and send it to me for inclusion. thanks, greg k-h