From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD4D031A62; Mon, 18 Dec 2023 11:57:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=kroah.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kroah.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kroah.com header.i=@kroah.com header.b="IwN1vhis"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="tcWIsBkE" Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEB9C5C0138; Mon, 18 Dec 2023 06:57:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 18 Dec 2023 06:57:22 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kroah.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1702900642; x=1702987042; bh=oNCXpmzOnp v/ZMs2C1LVLkDAobWIT06Q4NQom04jsYA=; b=IwN1vhisXOGaPhVE4Dhn4TW9/Z 5glTuEG1jsmAFC+YjD9LvXEi1LDjGfnlMjxWk4t8/cjqOXJDyyORyxc8WYrujZjn OIqLqiTd5aCie8Z50qdn/V1ToML/hcaWbikjBTBM81kYwXlXCPF7fszOUz0d6xCZ NhNpXR3OT/rYQyANwbF0McbQBhG5Z/BKEZSDa3Y8u/MzeEYr2CfznZ9+Blbic9Yz ytbVEuirHn8fcSJfUlvObvjy7KxmRlR7yNTC2VNl73PhJUS4dMAq86u/sBLIAyoJ x+BTotSQsQLcjaAsNLGPm9MrxAoGWMEljm8vaiCOdHive/XFX/wPfDIeP6/g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1702900642; x=1702987042; bh=oNCXpmzOnpv/ZMs2C1LVLkDAobWI T06Q4NQom04jsYA=; b=tcWIsBkE1buhqz932G1poGIONjJimqHG6++Mq379BdXX yEvsJs959+wwt++eYpHxB9FFYgh4NHGtiYKzxmB6PZ5daLwVSogkK5Allkche08n V6FiY/ahTSTIsUU8CAMWVk0SwMWOi7ylP3LIfF3NFb8Z7ZVC4qXsFyazpOkEXXjP CwViIE3L8NkiGc2vxLS0NZ8mBnCjZzooYSYWjJFlA2vLyglfq9PGFEubpquz6wic 1QN8H617XMtJz9VJslMhOogvvANcvGNpJkiNCn5c3iIL2iqFQzAI5LtdeJbixzca r6rzPSP4Ajpw/ROd1i6xLDYHbp8OeI5jBPpbI3Z61Q== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvkedrvddtkedgfedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvfevuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepifhrvghg ucfmjfcuoehgrhgvgheskhhrohgrhhdrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepheegvd evvdeljeeugfdtudduhfekledtiefhveejkeejuefhtdeufefhgfehkeetnecuvehluhhs thgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepghhrvghgsehkrhhorg hhrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i787e41f1:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 18 Dec 2023 06:57:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 12:57:20 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Robert Kolchmeyer Cc: Sasha Levin , stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, regressions@lists.linux.dev, eric.snowberg@oracle.com, zohar@linux.ibm.com, jlayton@kernel.org Subject: Re: IMA performance regression in 5.10.194 when using overlayfs Message-ID: <2023121848-filter-pacifier-c457@gregkh> References: <000000000000b505f3060c454a49@google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 04:37:31PM -0800, Robert Kolchmeyer wrote: > > Looking at the dependencies you've identified, it probably makes sense > > to just take them as is (as it's something we would have done if these > > dependencies were identified explicitly). > > > > I'll plan to queue them up after the current round of releases is out. > > Sounds great, thank you! I've dropped them now as there are some reported bug fixes with just that commit that do not seem to apply properly at all, and we can't add new problems when we know we are doing so :) So can you provide a working set of full backports for the relevant kernels that include all fixes (specifically stuff like 8a924db2d7b5 ("fs: Pass AT_GETATTR_NOSEC flag to getattr interface function")) so that we can properly queue them up then? Or, conversely, we can revert the other commits if you think that would be better? thanks, greg k-h