On Tue, May 26 2020, Sasha Levin wrote:

Hi

[This is an automated email]

This commit has been processed because it contains a -stable tag. The stable tag indicates that it's relevant for the following trees: 2.6.12+

The bot has tested the following trees: v5.6.14, v5.4.42, v4.19.124, v4.14.181, v4.9.224, v4.4.224.

v5.6.14: Build OK! v5.4.42: Build OK! v4.19.124: Build OK! v4.14.181: Build OK! v4.9.224: Build OK! v4.4.224: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies: 302d3deb2068 ("xprtrdma: Prevent inline overflow") 65b80179f9b8 ("xprtrdma: No direct data placement with krb5i and krb5p") 94f58c58c0b4 ("xprtrdma: Allow Read list and Reply chunk simultaneously") cce6deeb56aa ("xprtrdma: Avoid using Write list for small NFS READ requests")

NOTE: The patch will not be queued to stable trees until it is upstream.

How should we proceed with this patch?

The conflict is trivial - this patch adds a field (domain) to 'struct pf_desc" which at the time didn't have an expected field (datatouch). You can merge it manually or ask me when the time comes and I'll provide a backport. (65b80179f9b8 is the textual dependency, but it is no a semantic dependency).

NeilBrown

-- Thanks Sasha