On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 02:30:23PM +0000, Felipe Franciosi wrote: > > > On 10 Aug 2018, at 20:43, Felipe Franciosi <felipe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > >> On 10 Aug 2018, at 11:32, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 05:10:52PM +0000, Felipe Franciosi wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 10 Aug 2018, at 03:15, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 10:31:29AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > >>>>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 02:09:01AM +0000, Felipe Franciosi wrote: > >>>>>> Hi Ming (and all), > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Your series "scsi: virtio_scsi: fix IO hang caused by irq vector automatic affinity" which forces virtio-scsi to use blk-mq fixes an issue introduced by 84676c1f. We noticed that this bug also exists in 4.14.y (as ef86f3a72adb), but your series was not backported to that stable branch. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Are there any plans to do that? At least CoreOS is using 4.14 and showing issues on AHV (which provides an mq virtio-scsi controller). > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi Felipe, > >>>>> > >>>>> Looks the following 4 patches should have been marked as stable, sorry > >>>>> for missing that. > >>>>> > >>>>> b5b6e8c8d3b4 scsi: virtio_scsi: fix IO hang caused by automatic irq vector affinity > >>>>> 2f31115e940c scsi: core: introduce force_blk_mq > >>>>> adbe552349f2 scsi: megaraid_sas: fix selection of reply queue > >>>>> 8b834bff1b73 scsi: hpsa: fix selection of reply queue > >>>>> > >>>>> Usually this backporting is done by our stable guys, so I will CC stable > >>>>> and leave them handle it, but I am happy to provide any help for > >>>>> addressing conflicts or sort of thing. > >>>> > >>>> As the above patches do not apply "cleanly" to the 4.14.y tree at all, > >>>> can you please provide a set of backported patches that I can apply? > >>> > >>> Actually, adbe552349f2 is already present in 4.14.y. It is commit e58114824fa6. > >>> > >>> If you skip that, all the other three apply cleanly. > >> > >> Ok, that works, but there's another bug report of aacraid having > >> problems. Any ideas? > > > > Heya, I actually have no idea which bug you are talking about. TBH I'm only experiencing the bug fixed by b5b6e8c8d3b4, which only requires 2f31115e940c. (I tested a 4.14 with both commits which resolves the bug.) > > > > I doubt any of that would have any interference with aacraid and should be safe backports in that respect. > > Hi Greg, sorry to bother but I didn't hear anything back about this. > Are you picking up 2f31115e940c and b5b6e8c8d3b4 for 4.14.y or waiting > for some other action? They are in 4.14.63-rc1 right now, did you not see them? thanks, greg k-h
