On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 7:23 PM Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) regressions@leemhuis.info wrote:
On 11.03.24 19:41, David Sterba wrote:
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 10:15:31AM +0100, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
On 06.03.24 13:39, Filipe Manana wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 9:26 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
6.7-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
It would be better to delay the backport of this patch (and the followup fix) to any stable release, because it introduced another regression for which there is a reviewed fix but it's not yet in Linus' tree:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/cover.1709202499.git.fdmanana@suse.com/
Those two missed 6.8 afaics. Will those be heading to mainline any time soon?
Yes, in the 6.9 pull request.
Great!
And how fast afterwards will it be wise to backport them to 6.8? Will anyone ask Greg for that when the time has come?
The commits have stable tags and will be processed in the usual way.
I'm missing something. The first change from Filipe's series linked above has a fixes tag, but no stable tag afaics: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kdave/linux.git/commit/?h=fo...
It has no stable tag because when I sent the patch there was yet no kernel release with the buggy commit, which landed in 6.8-rc6. Now it would make sense to add the stable tag because 6.8 was released yesterday and it's the first release with the buggy commit.
So there is no guarantee that Greg will pick it up; and I assume if he does he only will do so after -rc1 (or later, if the CVE stuff continues to keep him busy).
Don't worry, we are paying attention to that and we'll remind Greg if necessary.
As Filipe wrote "can actually have serious consequences" this got me slightly worried. That's why I'm a PITA here, sorry -- but as I said, maybe I'm missing something.
The second of the patches has none of those tags, but well, from the patch descriptions it seems that is just a optimization, so that is likely not something to worry about: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kdave/linux.git/commit/?h=fo...
Yes, it's an optimization. If it were a bug fix, I would have added a Fixes tag and would have described what the bug was.
Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking: https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page.