Re: Requesting backport for fc20c523211 (cifs: fixes for get_inode_info)

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 12:51:32AM -0500, Steve French wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 1:35 AM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 12:34:43PM +0530, Meetakshi Setiya wrote:
> > > commit fc20c523211a38b87fc850a959cb2149e4fd64b0 upstream
> > > cifs: fixes for get_inode_info
> > > requesting backport to 6.8.x, 6.6.x, 6.5.x and 6.1.x
> > >
> > > This patch fixes memory leaks, adds error checking, and performs some important
> > > code modifications to the changes introduced by patch 2 of this patch series:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/stable/CAFTVevX6=4qFo6nwV14sCnfPRO9yb9q+YsP3XPaHMsP08E05iQ@mail.gmail.com/
> > > commit ffceb7640cbfe6ea60e7769e107451d63a2fe3d3
> > > (smb: client: do not defer close open handles to deleted files)
> > >
> > > This patch and the three patches in the mails that precede this are related and
> > > fix an important customer reported bug on the linux smb client (explained in the
> > > mail for patch 1). Patches 2, 3 and 4 are meant to fix whatever regressions were
> > > introduced/exposed by patch 1.
> > > The patches have to be applied in the mentioned order and should be backported
> > > together.
> >
> > Then PLEASE send this as a patch series, as picking patches out of
> > emails that arrive in random order in a "correct" way is tough, if not
> > impossible for us to do.
> >
> > Please send these as a backported set of patches, OR as a list of
> > "cherry-pick these git ids in this order" type of thing.  But spreading
> > it out over 4 emails just does not work, and is very very confusing.
> 
> To make it easier, I recommend we wait a few days on this as there is
> one more important fix for this series that was recently found (by Paulo)
> and I haven't sent to Linus yet - then can send the complete set
> for at least 6.8 and 6.6 stable.  Do you prefer a separate email
> for the 6.8 version of these, and another for the 6.6 rebased
> version of the series - or all as one email? AFAIK she hasn't
> rebased for 6.1LTS.

If the versions are different, yes, individual series are appreciated.
If they are identical, one is fine.

thanks,

greg k-h