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 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 737D4D6A226 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:41:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=VXVbts4lXvoeKrC/LpKw9ZV7Am+rAqJw0bxQd44XtIQ=; b=20pHyJWWyJ7kJ57HyqGKxsAkTz VlgBZGjxkd2VJQ7YGmD7CrQt3Zuxt0n0OWeh5o7krADfn5oF2OGKRtzCp9+4vM3UOj4umWdYD7IUD ZPw/3aDI63AbtpMUBrgkkPFQDJC+sIRrX8rsNum0zJfMtrergFGkryxGWiITFeCMyEIUT5r/o95KB EsH23caT7stusBDEEfAgy0QhcfSmxJ+A03DVqORX+V1iDHScst39++5Wrq6unGtsAY5YEZy/HLnuG wFdorOOX5gDzCXq1tQfrLzYTZPf6EVON5S2CpAUi+lFbeoj9GfTw9/3+65O+KNvJ7kHbyfbZ4uvaA RiezBMGQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tBemq-00000000Vkm-2rkN; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:41:48 +0000 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org ([2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tBemp-00000000VkC-0mZK for linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:41:48 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F3105C53F0; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:41:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 11997C4CECD; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:41:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1731609706; bh=SIUiMf5isIrqlY+FZc0cBtFYH8rPHcIuoEJBpAOrI18=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=JiOrqj5NLT4/f1WuYm9J+r9+VGJVLjppAiGLHM1iHjz/Mr+sArF8vk0yQ9P5AOqPW ulpwOdOFMfGeqUwK9KFO9nt/OWbDRILggCn6c4MA0pl5k0oUWPPxeqOGkK63qtcm/T 5Z5qzJ5nlGHSRY+iK4w8xPCegjG8Oa6+9VJD41hDv/afR3ft0CvJMiu+L1SaVBpLEn id6Xxw5VqzEwjhjD7HnEJR/Es9+Z27NeW4V5u2tvKNmEplCZPlmuk1qovLvLLn8YWE ootxG4HDePeZ3DWzZj8yfq69Yu8VodP1PUK6Gbu/A/orS1+a0kp3Qybv7roKGaI1wU yhfYYUObW8HHA== Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 11:41:43 -0700 From: Keith Busch To: Jens Axboe Cc: hch@lst.de, sagi@grimberg.me, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] nvme fix for Linux 6.12 Message-ID: References: <058d94f1-da1d-49d4-aeb9-10fda3069c99@kernel.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <058d94f1-da1d-49d4-aeb9-10fda3069c99@kernel.dk> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20241114_104147_276230_D340B005 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 15.39 ) X-BeenThere: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "Linux-nvme" Errors-To: linux-nvme-bounces+linux-nvme=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 11:28:15AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 11/14/24 11:19 AM, Keith Busch wrote: > > Same fix as the last week's nvme fix, but for nvme-multipath. It should > > have been included with our previous pull-request, but I did see the > > message in my queue until too late. > > Just to avoid yet another merge conflict, can we please just push this > to 6.13 instead and just mark it stable? We probably should've done that > with the other one as well, it's not like they are important fixes. I was sending this now because I thought it would make it easier for stable to pick up without having to back out unrelated 6.13 conflicts. I just tried to merge upstream with this and block-6.13, and it actually looks like there aren't any conflicts anywa, so it doesn't matter. So yes, let's drop this and I'll send it with the next nvme-6.13 pull request next week.