On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 4:04 PM Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 09.08.23 15:13, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > > If this can't be fixed quickly, I suppose it's safer to revert it from > > 6.4.y for now. 6.5 is still being cooked, but 6.4.x is already in > > wide deployment, hence the regression has to be addressed quickly. > feel free to send reverts to mainline and add my r-by tage to it and I can push those changes up. Sadly those patches fixed another use-after-free, but it seems like we have to take another shot unless somebody does have time to look into it promptly. > Good luck with that. To quote > https://docs.kernel.org/process/handling-regressions.html : > > ``` > Regarding stable and longterm kernels: > > [...] > > * Whenever you want to swiftly resolve a regression that recently also > made it into a proper mainline, stable, or longterm release, fix it > quickly in mainline; when appropriate thus involve Linus to fast-track > the fix (see above). That's because the stable team normally does > neither revert nor fix any changes that cause the same problems in mainline. > ``` > > Note the "normally" in there, so there is a chance. > > Ciao, Thorsten >
