On Wed, 21 Nov 2012, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 10:11:28AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:39:21AM -0800, Sage Weil wrote:
> > > On Wed, 31 Oct 2012, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > 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.
> > > 
> > > Before I send a huge patch series, fair warning: it's big, 107 patches.  
> > > Shortlog below.  You can peek at the series at
> > > 
> > >  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sage/ceph-client.git 
> > > wip-3.4-stable
> > > 
> > > It's a series of cleanups and small fixes that culminated in a few 
> > > patches 
> > > resolving the last of the locking problems.  What's not in the series is 
> > > the drivers/block/rbd.c work (~50 patches), and the small amount of new 
> > > functionality that went into net/ceph/ (~19 patches).
> > > 
> > > Should I send the whole pile along?
> > 
> > I see 114 patches in this branch right now, is that correct?
> 
> I've queued up all 114 patches, as they all looked sane, thanks for
> providing these.  If there is anything else I should apply, please let
> me know.

Will do, thanks!

sage
--
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

Reply via email to