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 vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7339FC0502C for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 12:38:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231443AbiIAMiY (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2022 08:38:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40382 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229679AbiIAMiX (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2022 08:38:23 -0400 Received: from mail-vs1-xe34.google.com (mail-vs1-xe34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e34]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8700120B8; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 05:38:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vs1-xe34.google.com with SMTP id 67so17575561vsv.2; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 05:38:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=manUgzUchMr/kk2iObdD1tVGtQFlRaB7HSsDXdMMG/8=; b=I/2mKscmr7L5fXvEudZ/1uzdbH26HSPc2H85U7npxYotkRLdgzIneX5nJy4QTRHm71 9HoX40yRw63oNdxK/GbUo7ufxc4LkFOyjQ33ioiMrM9LGy4hnhM8KqVRyWTRCklgxlHC XF4xtaBAGnV7z/4OT6yngVRRxNHxxaxzwMAo7Q+8kegCIf5M64bVWeD1FbRLhcXQbL5X if23Mv4Xs+M9mav+DN3ocF1P3mVcXZN2Pg20grOXdZMBdqHm9urNORU/T5eLs0ibqn3K ERBTpN3aKzkMlNMt1eoBKb4XP50vuzUok8RuQ1IJANDJWowvw3D353QW7FDArvBn9nkX DI3A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=manUgzUchMr/kk2iObdD1tVGtQFlRaB7HSsDXdMMG/8=; b=tIav4gKh/QnCu7mRKdu+HrxNEb96cCZQZRwNOjsT6VOEOqDx4uXsC3Ji01vvTz2eDG yy59mfNl+2eGns+xeOKEoEdENMlaiWZMTxuvGorue1q22kzlids2HKlPE+C50RIEvba9 UV2D3PkMiOS0eY0o0mLsQqxAeUHmGVc1aJCuo8KFdbPWBgu5Guwr+vRmc9g20XMJHlI/ rjOhq2AvqnBmGTvJfyvB4gLieX19irmEzufDsuppS3ALZxQPvefuNWssio5CH9uSzTtR WL4s2AAUvYUknSfE+1UsQVz0zwleSfyr5D/FColi2dCLNDMwu8xUAHx26HHC5QUTPRhV gOzQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo0wzwfu1aQ2/Vn1Yf7IWHslnQhUmYX32oGU+/c+ogvIXxy/9dno VAS2l9iAHkuIHW89WgXXwBHMFOEbdRC53wJpZUk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR7OMOMrQ0S5oAiOPh2AE2LxJ35YD/csQ7Sh/OhjTWjb4/+06mA1/BieVDvxIN89mLfRtb3kvVRKZ08YyEllZJc= X-Received: by 2002:a67:b90f:0:b0:390:cb3e:efb8 with SMTP id q15-20020a67b90f000000b00390cb3eefb8mr7522424vsn.71.1662035890462; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 05:38:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220901054854.2449416-1-amir73il@gmail.com> <20220901054854.2449416-7-amir73il@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Amir Goldstein Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 15:37:59 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 v2 6/7] xfs: reorder iunlink remove operation in xfs_ifree To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Frank Hofmann , Sasha Levin , "Darrick J . Wong" , Leah Rumancik , Chandan Babu R , Luis Chamberlain , Adam Manzanares , linux-xfs , stable , Dave Chinner , "Darrick J . Wong" , Dave Chinner Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 1:26 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 01:16:33PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 12:41 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman > > wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 12:30:13PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 12:04 PM Frank Hofmann wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 6:49 AM Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Dave Chinner > > > > > > > > > > > > commit 9a5280b312e2e7898b6397b2ca3cfd03f67d7be1 upstream. > > > > > > > > > > > > [backport for 5.10.y] > > > > > > > > > > Hi Amir, hi Dave, > > > > > > > > > > I've got no objections to backporting this change at all. We've been > > > > > using the patch on our internal 5.15 tracker branch happily for > > > > > several months now. > > > > > > > > > > Would like to highlight though that it's currently not yet merged in > > > > > linux-stable 5.15 branch either (it's in 5.19 and mainline alright). > > > > > If this gets queued for 5.10 then maybe it also should be for 5.15 ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Frank, > > > > > > > > Quoting from my cover letter: > > > > > > > > Patches 6-7 in this 5.10.y update have not been applied to 5.15.y yet. > > > > I pointed Leah's attention to these patches and she said she will > > > > include them in a following 5.15.y update. > > > > > > And as you know, this means I can't take this series at all until that > > > series is ready, so to help us out, in the future, just don't even send > > > them until they are all ready together. > > > > > > > What? > > > > You cannot take backports to 5.10.y before they are applied to 5.15.y? > > Since when? > > Since always. > > Why would you ever want someone to upgrade from an older tree (like > 5.10.y) to a newer one (5.15.y) and have a regression? > That is certainly not a goal when backporting fixes to 5.10.y, but it can happen as a by-product of the decentralized nature of testing backports. But it did not bother you when xfs patches were applied to 5.4.y and no xfs patches at all applied to 5.10.y for two years? > So we always try to make sure patches are always applied to newer trees > first. Yes, sometimes we miss this and make mistakes, but it's always > been this way and we fix that whenever it happens accidentally. > That is my intention. I will try to keep to that rule in the future. I would have waited for the patches to land in 5.15.y, but Leah got distracted by another task so I decided to not wait, knowing that the patches are already in her queue. > I'll drop this series from my review queue for now until the 5.15.y > series shows up. Please don't drop the series. Please drop patches 6-7 if you must Or if you insist I can re-post patches 1-5. Thanks, Amir.