On 2/17/21 9:26 PM, Greg KH wrote:
A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting? A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
A: No. Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
Sorry for the inconvenience. I reply in the topmost because I reply to the email of myself and want to discuss something overall, i.e. if this issue needs to be fixed in stable tree.
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 09:12:38PM +0800, JeffleXu wrote:
Hi all,
Would you please evaluate if these should be fixed in stable tree, at least for the virtio-blk scenario [1] ?
What is "these"?
I think I have clarified in the previous mail [1]. And yes it was already one week ago and the context seems a little confusing here. Sorry for that. In short, the symlink file '/dev/disk/by-id/XXXX' can't be created for virtio-blk devices, which could be fixed by [2].
[1] commit e982c4d0a29b1d61fbe7716a8dcf8984936d6730 ("virtio-blk: modernize sysfs attribute creation")
Do you want this backported?
Yes, better to have it backported. I can maintain the fix as a private patch in my 4.19 repository. I request to backport it into 4.19 stable tree, bacause I think 4.19 stable tree may also suffers this issue.
To where?
At least 4.19 stable tree, though all code previous 4.20 may also suffers, since this is fixed in 4.20 upstream.
Why?
Explained in [1].
If so, where is the working backport that you have properly tested?
I want to backport the upstream patch (commit fef912bf860e and e982c4d0a29b).
Sasha ever picked up another patch ([3]) from the same upstream patch set [4], and manually reorganized a little. The reason is explained in [5].
These two patches (commit fef912bf860e and e982c4d0a29b) could be directly applied to 4.19 stable tree. But to backport these two patches, like Sasha said in [5], we need to revert the previous patch that Sasha backported, and apply the upstream version.
I'm not sure if I shall send the patch (since I'm not the author of the upstream patch), or the maintainer apply the patch directly.
[1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/stable/msg442203.html [2] commit e982c4d0a29b1d61fbe7716a8dcf8984936d6730 ("virtio-blk: modernize sysfs attribute creation") [3] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-block/patch/20180905070053.26239-... [4] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-block/cover/20180905070053.26239-... [5] https://www.spinics.net/lists/stable/msg442196.html