From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG Subject: Re: bcache: for-next unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000019 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 19:49:33 +0200 Message-ID: <4d03983e-c052-e8a8-ac77-aa6f9844a940@profihost.ag> References: <5cd9d4e9-88b2-c24b-f6ed-dad3f8b21283@profihost.ag> <4f1c616f-2e86-2cd3-162c-4ee7a3a02bf4@coly.li> <08c770ef-eb09-ed55-a7bb-31b1b97a88d9@coly.li> <26bed6fb-d433-bcb7-4428-ed7b771f2def@profihost.ag> <52830ea6-a17c-e3a6-f4fb-bc463615aac4@lyle.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from cloud1-vm154.de-nserver.de ([178.250.10.56]:55815 "EHLO cloud1-vm154.de-nserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932143AbdJWRtg (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Oct 2017 13:49:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <52830ea6-a17c-e3a6-f4fb-bc463615aac4@lyle.org> Content-Language: de-DE Sender: linux-bcache-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Lyle , Coly Li , linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org Am 23.10.2017 um 18:48 schrieb Michael Lyle: > On 10/23/2017 07:26 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: >> It seems i'm missing a5f3d8a5eaaf but i have 09b3efec81de. >> >> I missed it because >> git log ..linux-block/for-next -- drivers/md/bcache/ >> >> does not show it. It seems linux-block/for-next does not contain it? >> Which branch should i use? > > This is one of the pitfalls of selectively taking a bunch of changes > back into an older kernel series, especially from development trees. > linux-block/for-next is guaranteed to contain all the changes needed to > take the linux-next tree into complete state, but not necessarily to be > based on a point in time on linux-next that captures all past changes. > Similarly, there's no guarantee that current bcache code will work well > on the 4.4 kernel without changes-- i.e. I am accepting changes that > rely on recent changes in kernel facilities to compile, and I would > accept changes that rely on recent changes in semantics to be correct. Yes sure but that's no problem. I already backported them. Stefan