From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1754525AbcKVBjN (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 21 Nov 2016 20:39:13 -0500
Received: from mail-pg0-f67.google.com ([74.125.83.67]:35879 "EHLO
        mail-pg0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1753695AbcKVBjL (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 21 Nov 2016 20:39:11 -0500
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 10:39:13 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>, Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>,
        David Disseldorp <ddiss@suse.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zram: Fix unbalanced idr management at hot removal
Message-ID: <20161122013913.GC5197@jagdpanzerIV>
References: <20161121132140.12683-1-tiwai@suse.de>
 <20161122001104.GA31611@bbox>
 <20161122010930.GA5197@jagdpanzerIV>
 <20161122012212.GA11635@bbox>
 <20161122012812.GB5197@jagdpanzerIV>
 <20161122013318.GA11961@bbox>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161122013318.GA11961@bbox>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On (11/22/16 10:33), Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 10:28:12AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > On (11/22/16 10:22), Minchan Kim wrote:
> > [..]
> > > > > Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
> > > > 
> > > > Link: lkml.kernel.org/r/20161121132140.12683-1-tiwai@suse.de
> > > > Fixes: 17ec4cd98578 ("zram: don't call idr_remove() from zram_remove()")
> > > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>    [4.5+]
> > > 
> > > 17ec4cd98578 marked as stable: [4.2+] so we should mark this patch as
> > > 4.2+.
> > 
> > well, no objections. except that the patch in question was
> > not picked up -stable
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/tree/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c?id=refs/tags/v4.2#n1365
> > 
> > the change appears starting from 4.5
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/tree/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c?id=refs/tags/v4.5#n1371


> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/tree/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c?id=refs/tags/v4.4.34#n1370

oh, ok. good find. 4.4+ then? there are no affected stable/longterm
kernels older than 4.4.x anyway (4.1 lts has no dynamic zram management).

	-ss