On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 11:09:23 +0100 Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2/19/24 10:52, Marco Elver wrote: > > On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 at 10:48, Mikhail Gavrilov > > <mikhail.v.gavrilov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, Feb 3, 2024 at 1:14 AM Mikhail Gavrilov > >> <mikhail.v.gavrilov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > > >> > You are right. > >> > Thanks for digging into it! > >> > > >> > >> This [2] revert is still not merged at least I checked on 4f5e5092fdbf. > >> Is there any plan to merge it or find another approach? > >> > >> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240118110216.2539519-2-elver@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > I think it's already in -mm and -next. It just takes time, which is a > > good thing, after all we want to let -next testing confirm nothing is > > wrong with it. > > > > Andrew, is this planned for the next merge window or as a "hot fix" > > for the current rc? Given it has the right "Fixes" tags it will make > > it to stable kernels eventually, but I also think that the previous > > "slow" version is almost unusable on big systems, so it may be > > worthwhile considering the current rc. > > Yeah it would be best to fix in 6.8 to prevent regressions. > I'm all confused. 4434a56ec209 ("stackdepot: make fast paths lock-less again") was mainlined for v6.8-rc3. That patch Fixed: 108be8def46e ("lib/stackdepot: allow users to evict stack traces") which was mainlined for v6.8-rc1, so 4434a56ec209 did not need a cc:stable?
