On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:32 AM Sasha Levin <sas...@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> [This is an automated email]
>
> This commit has been processed because it contains a -stable tag.
> The stable tag indicates that it's relevant for the following trees: 4.4+
>
> The bot has tested the following trees: v5.2.14, v4.19.72, v4.14.143,
> v4.9.192, v4.4.192.
>
> v5.2.14: Build OK!
> v4.19.72: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies:
> 6b5fc433a7ad ("Btrfs: fix fsync after succession of renames of different
> files")
> a3baaf0d786e ("Btrfs: fix fsync after succession of renames and
> unlink/rmdir")
> b8aa330d2acb ("Btrfs: improve performance on fsync of files with multiple
> hardlinks")
>
> v4.14.143: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies:
> 0d836392cadd ("Btrfs: fix mount failure after fsync due to hard link
> recreation")
> 1f250e929a9c ("Btrfs: fix log replay failure after unlink and link
> combination")
> 6b5fc433a7ad ("Btrfs: fix fsync after succession of renames of different
> files")
> 8d9e220ca084 ("btrfs: simplify IS_ERR/PTR_ERR checks")
> a3baaf0d786e ("Btrfs: fix fsync after succession of renames and
> unlink/rmdir")
> b8aa330d2acb ("Btrfs: improve performance on fsync of files with multiple
> hardlinks")
>
> v4.9.192: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies:
> 0b246afa62b0 ("btrfs: root->fs_info cleanup, add fs_info convenience
> variables")
> 0d836392cadd ("Btrfs: fix mount failure after fsync due to hard link
> recreation")
> 1f250e929a9c ("Btrfs: fix log replay failure after unlink and link
> combination")
> 4791c8f19c45 ("btrfs: Make btrfs_check_ref_name_override take
> btrfs_inode")
> 6b5fc433a7ad ("Btrfs: fix fsync after succession of renames of different
> files")
> a3baaf0d786e ("Btrfs: fix fsync after succession of renames and
> unlink/rmdir")
> cf8cddd38bab ("btrfs: don't abuse REQ_OP_* flags for btrfs_map_block")
> da17066c4047 ("btrfs: pull node/sector/stripe sizes out of root and into
> fs_info")
> db0a669fb002 ("btrfs: Make btrfs_add_link take btrfs_inode")
> de143792253e ("btrfs: struct btrfsic_state->root should be an fs_info")
> fb456252d3d9 ("btrfs: root->fs_info cleanup, use fs_info->dev_root
> everywhere")
>
> v4.4.192: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies:
> 0132761017e0 ("btrfs: fix string and comment grammatical issues and
> typos")
> 09cbfeaf1a5a ("mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and
> page_cache_{get,release} macros")
> 0b246afa62b0 ("btrfs: root->fs_info cleanup, add fs_info convenience
> variables")
> 0d836392cadd ("Btrfs: fix mount failure after fsync due to hard link
> recreation")
> 0e749e54244e ("dax: increase granularity of dax_clear_blocks()
> operations")
> 1f250e929a9c ("Btrfs: fix log replay failure after unlink and link
> combination")
> 44f714dae50a ("Btrfs: improve performance on fsync against new inode
> after rename/unlink")
> 4791c8f19c45 ("btrfs: Make btrfs_check_ref_name_override take
> btrfs_inode")
> 52db400fcd50 ("pmem, dax: clean up clear_pmem()")
> 6b5fc433a7ad ("Btrfs: fix fsync after succession of renames of different
> files")
> 781feef7e6be ("Btrfs: fix lockdep warning about log_mutex")
> a3baaf0d786e ("Btrfs: fix fsync after succession of renames and
> unlink/rmdir")
> b2e0d1625e19 ("dax: fix lifetime of in-kernel dax mappings with
> dax_map_atomic()")
> bb7ab3b92e46 ("btrfs: Fix misspellings in comments.")
> cf8cddd38bab ("btrfs: don't abuse REQ_OP_* flags for btrfs_map_block")
> d1a5f2b4d8a1 ("block: use DAX for partition table reads")
> db0a669fb002 ("btrfs: Make btrfs_add_link take btrfs_inode")
> de143792253e ("btrfs: struct btrfsic_state->root should be an fs_info")
>
>
> NOTE: The patch will not be queued to stable trees until it is upstream.
>
> How should we proceed with this patch?
After it lands on Linus' tree, I'll try to send patch versions that
apply to different kernel releases.
Thanks.
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Sasha
--
Filipe David Manana,
“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't — you're right.”
