Re: XFS contention fix backport (3.5 - 3.2) feasible?

2013-03-19 Thread Oliver Bock
On 3/19/13 4:44 , Ben Hutchings wrote: Having read this: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.stable/45323/focus=50810 my impression is that backporting XFS changes is fraught with peril. So anyone who wants to do that had better get the result properly reviewed and tested. (There is a

XFS contention fix backport (3.5 - 3.2) feasible?

2013-03-18 Thread Oliver Bock
Hi, [please CC me in replies, thanks] Would it be possible to get the following fix backported to Debian Wheezy's 3.2 kernel series? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807503 RHEL just included this in their 6.4 release and I think it's an important patch, in particular for database

Re: XFS contention fix backport (3.5 - 3.2) feasible?

2013-03-18 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 14:42 +0100, Oliver Bock wrote: Hi, [please CC me in replies, thanks] Would it be possible to get the following fix backported to Debian Wheezy's 3.2 kernel series? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807503 RHEL just included this in their 6.4 release