On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 02:37:32PM -0500, Alex Elder wrote: > On 10/31/2012 02:29 PM, Sage Weil wrote: > > On Wed, 31 Oct 2012, Greg KH wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 05:37:31PM -0700, Sage Weil wrote: > >>> On Tue, 30 Oct 2012, Greg KH wrote: > >>>> What stable tree(s) do you want this applied to? > >>> > >>> Sorry- this series is for 3.6.x. Thanks! > >> > >> Why? It seems that some of these should also go to older kernels, like > >> 3.4 and 3.0, right? > > > > Yeah.. that's my dilemma. Alex put together branches in ceph-client.git > > picking out fixes for 3.4 and 3.5. The problem is that the important > > fixes were extensive patches (restructuring the locking for a whole > > segment of code), so I'm not sure how palatable they are for the stable > > kernels. They demonstrably fix the bugs, but they are big. I wanted to > > get these recent fixes into 3.6 stable before figuring out what to do > > about the older kernels. > > 9 patches on top of 3.5.4 (I know, 3.5.7 is current). Most of those > will probably be OK, or if really pressed, could be back-ported with > a bit more work. > > 3.4.9 has a 28 patch series, and I know some of those were not > direct bug fixes, they were patches put in place to make the > bug fixes apply without risking them becoming new bugs...
That's ok, and is how it should be done, if they are direct backports of patches that are already in Linus's tree. I'd rather have exact copies, and lots of them, than small number of newly created patches. > I think if we can get the big series int 3.4 stable it would > be preferable. Send them on and I'll be glad to review them. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
