Hello Tejun,
Thanks for your quick response.
On 18/3/14 22:09, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 02:18:04PM +0800, Joseph Qi wrote:
>> Fixes: ae1188963611 ("blkcg: consolidate blkg creation in blkcg_bio_issue_check()")
>> Reported-by: Jiufei Xue <jiufei.xue@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx #4.3+
>
> I'm a bit nervous about tagging it for -stable. Given the low rate of
> this actually occurring, I'm not sure the benefits outweigh the risks.
> Let's at least cook it for a couple releases before sending it to
> -stable.
>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/blk-cgroup.h b/include/linux/blk-cgroup.h
>> index 69bea82..dccd102 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/blk-cgroup.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/blk-cgroup.h
>> @@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ struct blkg_policy_data {
>> /* the blkg and policy id this per-policy data belongs to */
>> struct blkcg_gq *blkg;
>> int plid;
>> + bool offlined;
>> };
>
> This is pure bike-shedding but offlined reads kinda weird to me, maybe
> just offline would read better? Other than that,
>
Do I need to resend a new version for this?
Thanks,
Joseph
> Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks a lot for seeing this through.
>
