On Jul 31, 2024 / 19:29, Nilay Shroff wrote:
> Hi Shinichiro,
>
> On 7/31/24 18:16, Cyril Hrubis wrote:
> > Hi!
> >>> According to www.kernel.org, the 6.9 stable branch is already EOL. Is it planned
> >>> to backport the kernel fix to other longterm branches?
> >> I just checked this commit 5f75e081ab5c ("loop: Disable fallocate() zero and discard
> >> if not supported") hasn't been backported to any of the longterm stable kernel yet.
> >> However I don't know if there's any plan to backport it on longterm stable kernel.
> >
> > The patch will not apply into older branches since the in kernel API did
> > change, so I suppose that nobody will invest into rewriting the patch
> > since it's mostly cosmetic.
> >
>
> This commit 5f75e081ab5c has been backported to kernel v6.9.11 and per the above
> comment from Cyril, this commit shall not be backported further to any other longterm
> kernel.
>
> So is it reasonable to assume that this test would fail on kernel older than v6.9.11?
I have the same guess.
> And if this is true then how about rewriting the patch as below ?
>
> diff --git a/tests/loop/011 b/tests/loop/011
> index 35eb39b..a454848 100755
> --- a/tests/loop/011
> +++ b/tests/loop/011
> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
> DESCRIPTION="Make sure unsupported backing file fallocate does not fill dmesg with errors"
>
> requires() {
> + _have_kver 6 9 11
> _have_program mkfs.ext2
> }
I think this change is reasonable. Would you repost the patch?
