> On 10 Aug 2018, at 20:43, Felipe Franciosi <fel...@nutanix.com> wrote: > > >> On 10 Aug 2018, at 11:32, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> >> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 05:10:52PM +0000, Felipe Franciosi wrote: >>> >>>> On 10 Aug 2018, at 03:15, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 10:31:29AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 02:09:01AM +0000, Felipe Franciosi wrote: >>>>>> Hi Ming (and all), >>>>>> >>>>>> Your series "scsi: virtio_scsi: fix IO hang caused by irq vector >>>>>> automatic affinity" which forces virtio-scsi to use blk-mq fixes an >>>>>> issue introduced by 84676c1f. We noticed that this bug also exists in >>>>>> 4.14.y (as ef86f3a72adb), but your series was not backported to that >>>>>> stable branch. >>>>>> >>>>>> Are there any plans to do that? At least CoreOS is using 4.14 and >>>>>> showing issues on AHV (which provides an mq virtio-scsi controller). >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Felipe, >>>>> >>>>> Looks the following 4 patches should have been marked as stable, sorry >>>>> for missing that. >>>>> >>>>> b5b6e8c8d3b4 scsi: virtio_scsi: fix IO hang caused by automatic irq >>>>> vector affinity >>>>> 2f31115e940c scsi: core: introduce force_blk_mq >>>>> adbe552349f2 scsi: megaraid_sas: fix selection of reply queue >>>>> 8b834bff1b73 scsi: hpsa: fix selection of reply queue >>>>> >>>>> Usually this backporting is done by our stable guys, so I will CC stable >>>>> and leave them handle it, but I am happy to provide any help for >>>>> addressing conflicts or sort of thing. >>>> >>>> As the above patches do not apply "cleanly" to the 4.14.y tree at all, >>>> can you please provide a set of backported patches that I can apply? >>> >>> Actually, adbe552349f2 is already present in 4.14.y. It is commit >>> e58114824fa6. >>> >>> If you skip that, all the other three apply cleanly. >> >> Ok, that works, but there's another bug report of aacraid having >> problems. Any ideas? > > Heya, I actually have no idea which bug you are talking about. TBH I'm only > experiencing the bug fixed by b5b6e8c8d3b4, which only requires 2f31115e940c. > (I tested a 4.14 with both commits which resolves the bug.) > > I doubt any of that would have any interference with aacraid and should be > safe backports in that respect.
Hi Greg, sorry to bother but I didn't hear anything back about this. Are you picking up 2f31115e940c and b5b6e8c8d3b4 for 4.14.y or waiting for some other action? If there's something I can do to help, please let me know. I've already tested a 4.14.62 with the two commits above and confirmed it fixes the problem we're seeing. Thanks, Felipe
