On (12/11/18 22:08), Daniel Wang wrote: > > I've been meaning to try it but kept getting distracted by other > things. I'll try to find some time for it this week or next. Right now > my intent is to get Steven's patch into 4.14 stable as it evidently > fixed the particular issue I was seeing, and as Steven said it has > been in upstream since 4.16 so it's not like backporting it will raise > any red flags. I will start another thread on -stable for it. OK. > > I guess we still don't have a really clear understanding of what exactly > is going in your system > > I would also like to get to the bottom of it. Unfortunately I haven't > got the expertise in this area nor the time to do it yet. Hence the > intent to take a step back and backport Steven's patch to fix the > issue that has resurfaced in our production recently. No problem. I just meant that -stable people can be a bit "unconvinced". > Which two sets are you referring to specifically? I guess I used the wrong word: The first set (actually just one patch) is the one that makes consoles re-entrant from panic(). The other set - those 4 patches (Steven's patch, + Petr's patch + a patch that makes printk() atomic again). -ss
