On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 03:30:29PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 01:03:20PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:40:54AM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 11:24:43AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:24:14AM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 12:52:12PM -0500, bfields wrote: > > > > > > Please pull the following nfsd changes from the 'nfsd' branch at: > > > > > > > > > > > > git://linux-nfs.org/~bfields/linux.git for-2.6.34 nfsd > > > > > > > > > > > > This is an unusually quiet cycle for the NFS server--bugfixes, some IPv6 > > > > > > progress, and one new export operation to improve sync performance. > > > > > > > > > > > > One exception to the 'mostly quiet' statement was a regression in the > > > > > > rpc code which hit a lot of people: enormous thanks to Neil for tracking > > > > > > that down. > > > > > > > > > > However, I forgot to Cc stable on all of those. Stable people, could > > > > > you also take the following three commits?: > > > > > > > > > > f5822754ea006563e1bf0a1f43faaad49c0d8bb2 Revert "sunrpc: fix > > > > > peername failed on closed listener" > > > > > 1b644b6e6f6160ae35ce4b52c2ca89ed3e356e18 Revert "sunrpc: move > > > > > the close processing after do recvfrom method" > > > > > 301e99ce4a2f42a317129230fd42e6cd874c64b0 nfsd: ensure sockets > > > > > are closed on error > > > > > > > > > > Let me know if you need more information. > > > > > > > > I've queued all of these up for the .33 -stable tree. If any of them > > > > need to go into .32 (maybe that last one?), please let me know. > > > > > > Thanks; .32 needs all three of those. > > > > Ok, care to backport them and send them to stable@xxxxxxxxxx? They > > don't all apply cleanly from what I can see. > > Huh. I just checked out 2.6.32.10 and tried applying the patches a > couple different ways, and the worst I got was stuff like: > > patching file net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c > Hunk #1 succeeded at 711 (offset 5 lines). > > Is that enough that you don't consider them clean? > > In any case, I'll follow up with patches generated against 2.6.32.10. You are right, I don't know what I did wrong, sorry. I've now queued all of these up for the next .32 tree, as they are already in .33-stable. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
