From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefan Bader Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V7 0/4] Bundle fixes for Xen netfront / netback Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 12:08:16 +0100 Message-ID: <52EF78A0.5050301@canonical.com> References: <1366633243-17775-1-git-send-email-wei.liu2@citrix.com> <20130422.154139.1046488577191797292.davem@davemloft.net> <20130422195335.GA30755@zion.uk.xensource.com> <20140202072323.GA12154@u109add4315675089e695.ant.amazon.com> <20140203103028.GC713@zion.uk.xensource.com> <1391423956.10515.39.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> <52EF7453.2080207@canonical.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9170118933806053132==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <52EF7453.2080207@canonical.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell , Wei Liu Cc: Matt Wilson , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --===============9170118933806053132== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="et0SBvBJlFCOvNpXuCDD1V5CfAIwkUNIR" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --et0SBvBJlFCOvNpXuCDD1V5CfAIwkUNIR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 03.02.2014 11:49, Stefan Bader wrote: > On 03.02.2014 11:39, Ian Campbell wrote: >> On Mon, 2014-02-03 at 10:30 +0000, Wei Liu wrote: >>> On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 11:23:25PM -0800, Matt Wilson wrote: >>>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:53:35PM +0100, Wei Liu wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:41:39PM +0100, David Miller wrote: >>>>>> From: Wei Liu >>>>>> Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 13:20:39 +0100 >>>>>> >>>>>>> This series is now rebased onto net-next. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We would also like to ask you to queue it for stable-ish tree. I = can do the >>>>>>> backport if necessary. >>>>>> >>>>>> All applied, but this was a disaster. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, I misunderstood the workflow. >>>>> >>>>>> If you want bug fixes propagated into -stable you submit them to '= net' >>>>>> from the beginning. >>>>>> >>>>>> There is no other method by which to do this. >>>>>> >>>>>> By merging all of these changes to net-next, you will now have to = get >>>>>> them accepted again into 'net', and then (and only then) can you m= ake >>>>>> a request for -stable inclusion. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Understood. Will submit them against 'net' later. >>>> >>>> Did this ever happen? Is 9ecd1a75 (xen-netfront: reduce gso_max_size= >>>> to account for max TCP header) at all related to the "skb rides the >>>> rocket" related TX packet drops reported against 3.8.x kernels? >>>> >>>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-lts-raring/+bug/1195= 474 >>>> >>>> It seems like there are still some outstanding bugs in various -stab= le >>>> releases. >>>> >>> >>> As far as I can remember Ian and I requested relavant patches be >>> backported in May, after these series settled in mainline for some ti= me. >>> >>> <1369734465.3469.52.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> >>> >>> These series was backported to 3.9.y-stable tree. 3.8.y didn't pick t= hem >>> up. >> >> The stable guys don't maintain every tree indefinitely, usually only f= or >> a couple of releases after the next mainline release or something (I >> suppose you can find the official policy online somewhere). Presumably= >> these fixes came too late for the 3.8.y branch. >> >> Longterm stable trees are an exception and get longer backports, I don= 't >> think 3.8 is one of those though. >> >> If anyone wants further backports then they will need to speak to the >> Linux stable maintainers, although they should probably expect a "this= >> stable tree is now closed" type response for 3.8. >> >> Or perhaps the above link implies that Canonical are supporting their >> own LTS of Linux 3.8.y -- in which case the request should be made to >> whoever that maintainer is. >> >> Ian. >> > Yeah, it would be a Canonical maintained longterm tree. I am just check= ing to > verify which ones are missing the series. I will send out a request to = pull them > in after that. >=20 > -Stefan >=20 It turns out that most of the series was applied to the 3.8.y.z longterm = we look after and through that made its way into the Raring kernel which is based= on that. Only the first patch of the series fails to apply. But that is only= changing a error message which actually looks to be correct in that serie= s. http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=3Dubuntu/linux.git;a=3Dshortlog;h=3Drefs/h= eads/linux-3.8.y -Stefan --et0SBvBJlFCOvNpXuCDD1V5CfAIwkUNIR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJS73igAAoJEOhnXe7L7s6j9owP/1DWIyvvkoj1wdar5zeD8Wlx jKfkRIwyfOqhz4Zh9MrztXFX76Tg2sjNJs9VqL9+k8QqBgEFcOg0hdMYRcw2bd4Z Gusf4uP4g1nwfJEABs00MmoGlbVG+/LS/EGa/Mv/H8XIgjDpq9JPpva/7qppQKh8 pbdFtYBhKX9laBdFKtbZCSUs0ZmHpfgmY3VJ+/VQkiTaT6jkSTsA86yJBetgMsbz IF1ob9tGCF7/qgheQAzeeshc5lrnACe/eUSFiPOoCJ8QiqDd8YUgqiHIrlCG5KuV rXj1TtNkZihtfNlIo27zV7CtcXwBPDBWcz7veqfT7mCws9lWdcn1FS9Insn9r24O UMSrUexKwAKgVyIQY8B3C3r9LEarR4LGlXKG7HWqJRffIRmLPQI/9XpZDU8o421N 3hohr3Y+66FtOgDIgKQow6N6x4+IOMjQNB3rmP0QaSEN1sibMg53mYuraPcvP8re QynN2XNQXfRJngs8Pr5UtXPFEdNHQQ72y/dImnJ8fsBKcEdDbUSWowlSj0qioadZ sHKtrDBlccS8CdxvJOpWp4RRdYh+SmQzRSFlF29ykOWMjNNGG3HCUNH973APLEyv iaX7cNWy3cGZBxvT1JGldrlpfzWgqYPOre4GTYmQ90bTJHbx62pEOS7aR/5FplEZ 1PD293c2NNxn+a0YKBnP =MiQv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --et0SBvBJlFCOvNpXuCDD1V5CfAIwkUNIR-- --===============9170118933806053132== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel --===============9170118933806053132==--