On Mon, 2018-02-12 at 13:48 +0100, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:
Hi.
12.02.2018 12:22, Mike Galbraith wrote:
How does that work without someone actually submitting patches? CC stable and pass along a conveniently sorted cherry-pick list?
From my experience, Greg is fine with the list of hashes, but he needs an approval from the relevant subtree maintainer (Jens in this case).
Oh dear. I'm a bit reluctant to even mention this, buuut, when creating that hash list, I extracted/applied them to 4.15.3 via quilt to make sure that they really do slip right in.. and later, while building two fat enterprise config kernels concurrently, trees living in separate spinning rust buckets, box IO stalled on me. Not good. Hard reboot, clean up and try it again, it reproduced. Switch to master, that reproduced. Extra not good.
I found that rather odd, because I had earlier done this to 4.15..
patches/block-bfq:-fix-occurrences-of-request-finish-method-s-old-name.patch patches/block-bfq:-add-requeue-request-hook.patch
..ie take only the rename, wedge the fix in on top of it, beat on box, it worked fine. This morning, I go back to only those two, and box is again (at least pretending to be) perfectly happy to build the same trees it hung on twice in a row yesterday, it _seems_ to be completely uninterested in stalling no matter what I do.
So, something not so funny is still going on, here at least. Test results imply that something in that hash list _may_ not be all that desirable a thing to send to stable, but who knows, some playful gremlin may well be pulling my chain, will let box stall on me again a few seconds after I write that, and poke send :)
Ok IO gremlin, go for it...
-Mike