Hi Jens, On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 07:38:26PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 03/30/2017 05:45 PM, Minchan Kim wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 09:35:56AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > >> On 03/30/2017 09:08 AM, Minchan Kim wrote: > >>> Hi Jens, > >>> > >>> It seems you miss this. > >>> Could you handle this? > >> > >> I can, but I'm a little confused. The comment talks about replacing > >> the one I merged with this one, I can't do that. I'm assuming you > >> are talking about this commit: > > > > Right. > > > >> > >> commit 0bc315381fe9ed9fb91db8b0e82171b645ac008f > >> Author: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@xxxxxxx> > >> Date: Mon Mar 6 11:23:35 2017 +0100 > >> > >> zram: set physical queue limits to avoid array out of bounds accesses > >> > >> which is in mainline. The patch still applies, though. > > > > You mean it's already in mainline so you cannot replace but can revert. > > Right? > > If so, please revert it and merge this one. > > Let's please fold it into the other patch. That's cleaner and it makes > logical sense. Understood. > > >> Do we really REALLY need this for 4.11, or can we queue for 4.12 and > >> mark it stable? > > > > Not urgent because one in mainline fixes the problem so I'm okay > > with 4.12 but I don't want mark it as -stable. > > OK good, please resend with the two-line revert in your current > patch, and I'll get it queued up for 4.12. Yeb. If so, now that I think about it, it would be better to handle it via Andrew's tree because Andrew have been handled zram's patches and I have several pending patches based on it. So, I will send new patchset with it to Andrew. Thanks!
