On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 02:25:18PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > 95% of the time we take a patch that is not in Linus's tree, it is buggy > and causes problems in the long run. So if we really want a 4.19 LTS specific patch, I'd be OK with signing off on it from an ext4 perspective.... IF AND ONLY IF someone is willing to tell me that they ran "kvm-xfstests -c ext4/all -g auto" or the equivalent before and after applying the patch, and is willing to certify that there are no test regressions. Helpful links: * https://thunk.org/gce-xfstests * https://thunk.org/android-xfstests * Documentation links from https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld * https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/blob/master/Documentation/kvm-quickstart.md * https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/blob/master/Documentation/gce-xfstests.md (Note that running "-c ext4/all -g auto" will take some 12+ hours if the tests are run serially, which is why using gce-xfstests's lightweight test manager to run the file system test configurations in parallel is a big win.) > Or better yet, take the effort here and move off of 4.19 to a newer > kernel without this problem in it. What is preventing you from doing > that today? 4.19 is not going to be around for forever, and will > probably not even be getting fixes for stuff like RETBLEED, so are you > _SURE_ you want to keep using it? Or yeah, maybe it's better/cheaper/time for you to move off of 4.19. :-) - Ted P.S. If we go down this path, Greg K-H may also insist on getting the bug fix to the 5.4 LTS kernel, so that a bug isn't just fixed in 4.19 LTS but not 5.4 LTS. In which case, the same requirement of running "-c ext4/all -g auto" and showing that there are no test regressions is going to be a requirement for 5.4 LTS as well.
