From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=oITU=OI=linuxfoundation.org=gregkh@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 13:47:56 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>, stable@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
	"Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.14 25/35] iomap: sub-block dio needs to zeroout
 beyond EOF
Message-ID: <20181129124756.GA25945@kroah.com>
References: <20181129060110.159878-1-sashal@kernel.org>
 <20181129060110.159878-25-sashal@kernel.org>
 <20181129121458.GK19305@dastard>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181129121458.GK19305@dastard>
List-ID: <stable.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:14:59PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> 
> Cherry picking only one of the 50-odd patches we've committed into
> late 4.19 and 4.20 kernels to fix the problems we've found really
> seems like asking for trouble. If you're going to back port random
> data corruption fixes, then you need to spend a *lot* of time
> validating that it doesn't make things worse than they already
> are...

Any reason why we can't take the 50-odd patches in their entirety?  It
sounds like 4.19 isn't fully fixed, but 4.20-rc1 is?  If so, what do you
recommend we do to make 4.19 working properly?

thanks,

greg k-h