On 26.02.2018 12:01, NeilBrown wrote: > On Mon, Feb 26 2018, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> Hi Mike! On 19.02.2018 18:15, Mike Snitzer wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 19 2018 at 8:44am -0500, >>> Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> JFYI: This issues is tracked in the regression reports for Linux 4.16 >>>> (http://bit.ly/lnxregrep416 ) with this id: >>>> Linux-Regression-ID: lr#9e195f >>>> Please include this line in the comment section of patches that are >>> […] >>> The fix was already merged by Linus on Friday, see: >>> git.kernel.org/linus/8dd601fa8317243be887458c49f6c29c2f3d719f >> Ohh, thx for the pointer. Could you please next time add a tag like >> Fixes: 18a25da84354 ("dm: ensure bio submission follows a depth-first >> tree walk") > > The thing is... it didn't fix that commit. That commit was fine. > If fixed something else much further back, which that commit just made > more problematic. > That is why I added the Cc: stable with the earliest version that needed > fixing. > > Unfortunately, reality isn't always neat and tidy :-( when it is, I do > use Fixes: Ha, okay, sorry for the noise then. Side note: At the same time this is might be a reason why a "Linux-Regression-ID" or something like that might make sense, because it shows that even a bisected commit sometimes isn't enough to build a obvious connection between a regression report and the commit with the fix... Ciao, Thorsten -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
