Re: Patch "reiserfs: remove unneeded i_version bump" has been added to the 4.14-stable tree

[Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>]

On Thu, 2018-02-01 at 14:13 +0100, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
> 
>     reiserfs: remove unneeded i_version bump
> 
> to the 4.14-stable tree which can be found at:
>     http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
> 
> The filename of the patch is:
>      reiserfs-remove-unneeded-i_version-bump.patch
> and it can be found in the queue-4.14 subdirectory.
> 
> If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
> please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
> 
> 
> From foo@baz Thu Feb  1 13:45:42 CET 2018
> From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
> Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 11:20:15 -0400
> Subject: reiserfs: remove unneeded i_version bump
> 
> From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
> 
> 
> [ Upstream commit 9f97df50c52c2887432debb6238f4e43567386a5 ]
> 
> The i_version field in reiserfs is not initialized and is only ever
> updated here. Nothing ever views it, so just remove it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@verizon.com>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> ---
>  fs/reiserfs/super.c |    1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> 
> --- a/fs/reiserfs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/reiserfs/super.c
> @@ -2591,7 +2591,6 @@ out:
>  		return err;
>  	if (inode->i_size < off + len - towrite)
>  		i_size_write(inode, off + len - towrite);
> -	inode->i_version++;
>  	inode->i_mtime = inode->i_ctime = current_time(inode);
>  	mark_inode_dirty(inode);
>  	return len - towrite;
> 
> 
> Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from jlayton@redhat.com are
> 
> queue-4.14/lockd-fix-list_add-double-add-caused-by-legacy-signal-interface.patch
> queue-4.14/reiserfs-remove-unneeded-i_version-bump.patch

Is this needed to ease merging of another patch? I've no real objection
to including this as it should be harmless but it doesn't really fix a
bug per-se. I'm not sure we really need that in stable kernels.
-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>