From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28FC1C2BA83 for ; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 17:22:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E111820733 for ; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 17:22:21 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1581268942; bh=+0z1BXpbza53PIbAdcDgLM5HkkM9uwoMDmVOanBP/Zg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=AVHhCnC1Yu5htRK+ypl8IYckreh865hoiUCpQIj/Vtvt/Amo10TIN19FB0jAMtPlJ tlxEns6JyzTXjaO0KoFo7N7Zq7j3H8M4iw2Ipo9f0Ju9hBZ0yW3qOW21OWczNWa+Bx 0k+0R2z2Tjcij9UxyplHrYdLnwAGsBNED0e8tl/Y= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727407AbgBIRWV (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Feb 2020 12:22:21 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:42006 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727399AbgBIRWV (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Feb 2020 12:22:21 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [65.119.211.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 87C9520714; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 17:22:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1581268940; bh=+0z1BXpbza53PIbAdcDgLM5HkkM9uwoMDmVOanBP/Zg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=1unqZycGIhd18d7rJMvc45yMwpx7kOcNsa5IdA0TBLkflp+jDxrKfa2+hbn4tPx3V O9avO/PusQJl4YJqc1bFR63lzIaI3od4nPq5gQSXEoOY52Ww0i6vx51GiHLtK4rYil xd2AnVgUWtPvCnqvasTNeXNgSXQaFEGbeofxNxq4= Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2020 18:02:13 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Sasha Levin Cc: Jiri Slaby , josef@toxicpanda.com, dsterba@suse.com, martin@lichtvoll.de, wqu@suse.com, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] btrfs: do not zero f_bavail if we have available space" failed to apply to 5.5-stable tree Message-ID: <20200209170213.GA3075@kroah.com> References: <158124801131151@kroah.com> <45d4c547-7e27-3c59-e2f7-19f4e7b3548c@suse.cz> <20200209132640.GA2059551@kroah.com> <20200209155950.GD3584@sasha-vm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200209155950.GD3584@sasha-vm> Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Feb 09, 2020 at 10:59:50AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote: > On Sun, Feb 09, 2020 at 02:26:40PM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 09, 2020 at 02:04:21PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: > > > On 09. 02. 20, 12:33, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > > > > > > > > The patch below does not apply to the 5.5-stable tree. > > > > If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm > > > > tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit > > > > id to . > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > > > greg k-h > > > > > > > > ------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------ > > > > > > > > From d55966c4279bfc6a0cf0b32bf13f5df228a1eeb6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > > > From: Josef Bacik > > > > Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 09:31:05 -0500 > > > > Subject: [PATCH] btrfs: do not zero f_bavail if we have available space > > > > > > 5.5.2 was already released with this patch: > > > commit 165387a9c90152f35976d82feca6eff5f0d5ac02 > > > Author: Josef Bacik > > > Date: Fri Jan 31 09:31:05 2020 -0500 > > > > > > btrfs: do not zero f_bavail if we have available space > > > > > > commit d55966c4279bfc6a0cf0b32bf13f5df228a1eeb6 upstream. > > > > > > It cannot be applied twice :). > > > > Oops, Sasha beat me too it, sorry for the noise :) > > I've grabbed it for the fixes: tag, sorry :) Not a problem, much rather see patches try to get applied more than once, than not at all :)