Understood. Perfect. Thanks again for all the information!
BR
Ranjan
Am 21.10.19 um 19:07 schrieb Ilya Dryomov:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 6:12 PM Ranjan Ghosh <ghosh@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi Ilya,
>>
>> thanks for your answer - really helpful! We were so desparate today due
>> to this bug that we downgraded to -23. But it's very good to know that
>> -31 doesnt contain this bug and we could safely update back to this release.
>>
>> If a new version (say -33 is released): How/Where can I find out if it
>> contains the fix? Except of trying and having it crash, of course -
>> which I'm obviously very reluctant to do...
> Look at the changelog of the kernel package ("apt changelog" or
> similar). The changelog for 5.0.0-32 has
>
> - ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource
>
> You want see something along the lines of
>
> - Revert "ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource"
> - ceph: use ceph_evict_inode to cleanup inode's resource
>
> The first line is a revert of the incorrect backport and the second
> line is the correct backport. Having the correct backport in place
> isn't strictly necessary, so as long as you see a revert it should
> work fine.
>
>> And, one more question if I may: Would that problem also show up on Eoan
>> (Ubuntu 19.10) which has been released a few days ago if we used the
>> most recent Kernel there? I think it's 5.3.0-something if I'm not
>> mistaken...
> Anything based on 5.3 should be fine -- this is the kernel the original
> patch went into. The problem is how the original patch was backported,
> not that patch itself.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ilya
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
