From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Freemyer Subject: Re: backporting ext4 to 2.6.27 Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 18:52:48 -0400 Message-ID: References: <86980.98056.qm@web95210.mail.in2.yahoo.com> <20110509160548.GC19811@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: puru sothaman , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: "Ted Ts'o" Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:58753 "EHLO mail-bw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932436Ab1EIWxt convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 May 2011 18:53:49 -0400 Received: by bwz15 with SMTP id 15so4373103bwz.19 for ; Mon, 09 May 2011 15:53:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110509160548.GC19811@thunk.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 08:16:09PM +0530, puru sothaman wrote: >> Hi, >> >> =A0 =A0I am using 2.6.27.18 kernel.Currently the ext4 support in ker= nel >>is experimental version.I need a stable version ext4 patches for the >>above kernel.Can anyone help me in backporting the stable ext4 >>patches for 2.6.27 kernel. > > Backporting patches to an ancient kernel like 2.6.27 is one of those > painful things that get done by people who are paid to do so --- it's > hard to find volunteers willing to do such a grungy task.... > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0 - Ted Puru, As far as I know, 2.6.27 is not supported for any of the current security patches. openSUSE as an example 100% stopped back-porting security patches to it in Jan 2011 I believe. I don't know how many ext4 patches they or the community backported prior to that. As you said, it was experimental ... You can find the latest openSUSE 2.6.27 kernel source here: https://build.opensuse.org/package/files?package=3Dkernel-source&projec= t=3DDISCONTINUED%3AopenSUSE%3A11.1%3AUpdate If you look at series.conf in particular, you can see they advanced as far as the 2.6.27.56 stable kernel. Then they were reverting a few things from the official tree: patches.kernel.org/revert-ext4-changes-in-2.6.27.48.patch patches.kernel.org/revert-ext4-changes-in-2.6.27.47.patch patches.kernel.org/revert-vfs-remove-the-range_cont-writeback-mode.= -in-2.6.27.47.patch patches.kernel.org/revert-ext4-changes-in-2.6.27.19-and-2.6.27.20-a= nd-2.6.27.25.patch Then in addition they were applying: # ext2/ext3 ######################################################## patches.suse/ext3-barrier-default patches.suse/ext2-fsync-err patches.fixes/ext3-mark-super-uptodate patches.fixes/ext3_false_EIO_fix.diff patches.fixes/ext2_mtime_update_on_rename.diff ######################################################## # ext4 ######################################################## patches.fixes/ext4-fixes-2.6.28-rc8.patch patches.fixes/ext4-mballoc-preallocate.patch patches.fixes/ext4-use-a-fake-block-number-for-delayed-new-buffer_h= ead patches.fixes/ext4-fix-sub-block-zeroing-for-preallocated-writes patches.fixes/ext4-clear-unwritten-flag-after-extent-initialization patches.fixes/ext4-avoid-corrupting-the-uninitialized-bit-in-the-ex= tent-during-truncate patches.fixes/ext4-avoid-divide-by-zero-when-trying-to-mount-a-corr= upted-file-system patches.fixes/ext4-fix-i_flags-access-in-ext4_da_writepages_trans_b= locks patches.fixes/ext4-fix-potential-buffer-head-leak-when-add_dirent_t= o_buf-returns-enospc patches.fixes/ext4-fix-uninit-block-bitmap-initialization-when-s_me= ta_first_bg-is-non-zero patches.fixes/ext4-journal-all-modifications-in-ext4_xattr_set_hand= le patches.fixes/ext4-make-sure-directory-and-symlink-blocks-are-revok= ed patches.fixes/ext4-plug-a-buffer_head-leak-in-an-error-path-of-ext4= _iget patches.fixes/ext4-return-the-ptr_err-of-the-correct-pointer-in-set= up_new_group_blocks patches.fixes/jbd2-fix-race-between-write_metadata_buffer-and-get_w= rite_access patches.fixes/jbd2-add-enomem-checking-in-and-for-jbd2_journal_writ= e_metadata_buffer patches.fixes/percpu_counter-fbc_batch-should-be-a-variable-ext4 patches.fixes/ext4-consolidate-in_range-definitions You should find all of those patches in the link I posted. (See files: patches.kernel.org.tar.bz2, patches.suse.tar.bz2, patches.fixes.tar.bz2 ) In fact, all of the patches to go from 2.6.27 to 2.6.27.56 should be in the patches.kernel.org.tar.bz2 file. I don't know how 'stable' that makes the 2.6.27 kernels ext4 implementation, but you can see ext4 got a lot of patches even though it was officially experimental. One thing it definitely doesn't do is add any backports that have come out since the first of the year. And I doubt any of the other distros are doing that either. fyi: The stable patches are back-ported to 2.6.32 I believe. That kernel has also been designated by SUSE and Red Hat as a long term support kernel, so it gets lots of security patches. Can't you upgrade to it at least. If so, you can likely stick with it for a couple more years and get a full set of security patches as part of the pay-off. Good Luck Greg -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html