Re: [PATCH] blk-mq: sync the update nr_hw_queues with blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 04:35:03PM +0100, Giuliano Procida wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 15:59, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 10:16:45AM +0100, Giuliano Procida wrote:
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 08:33, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post
> > > > Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting?
> > > > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> > > > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> > > > A: Top-posting.
> > > > Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
> > > >
> > > > A: No.
> > > > Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
> > > >
> > > > http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
> > > >
> > > > :)
> > >
> > > I'm well aware of the above.
> > > Alas, I haven't used mutt properly in about 15 years and I'm still
> > > doing everything with Gmail.
> >
> > gmail can handle proper quoting, if you are stuck with that :)
> >
> > > Given that I was referring to the entire email thread, I punted on
> > > finding a place to insert a comment.
> > > BTW, there's a typo in the Q&A above. s/Were/Where/
> >
> > Ah, nice catch, first one to notice that in years!
> >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 08:27:55AM +0100, Giuliano Procida wrote:
> > > > > Hi Greg.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is this patch (and the similar one for 4.9) queued?
> > > >
> > > > f5bbbbe4d635 ("blk-mq: sync the update nr_hw_queues with
> > > > blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter") is in the following stable releases:
> > > >         4.4.224 4.9.219 4.14.176 4.19
> > > >
> > > > Do you not see it there?
> > >
> > > We are referring to different "it"s.
> > >
> > > Yours: f5bbbbe4d635 is the upstream patch that went into v4.19-rc1 and
> > > which you back-ported to at least some of these kernels. This is
> > > clearly there.
> >
> > Great.
> >
> > > Mine: the commit sent earlier in this email thread - it's a
> > > re-back-port, as I think the original back-port for 4.14 (and
> > > similarly for 4.9) is incorrect. This has clearly not reached public
> > > git, hence my question about whether the change was queued.
> >
> > I don't know what the git commit id you are looking for here, sorry.  I
> > don't have the whole thread anywhere.
> >
> > > These are the ids of messages containing my commits:
> > >
> > > 4.14: 20200608093950.86293-1-gprocida@google.com
> > > 4.9: 20200608094030.87031-1-gprocida@google.com
> >
> > Pointers to this on lore.kernel.org perhaps?
> >
> 
> I wasn't aware stable was publicly archived. Here you go:
> 
> 4.14: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20200608093950.86293-1-gprocida@google.com/
> 4.9: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20200608094030.87031-1-gprocida@google.com/

As per the git commit id in those emails, you should be able to
determine the same thing that I can, namely that that patch is in the
following stable releases:
	4.4.224 4.9.219 4.14.176 4.19

thanks,

greg k-h