On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 5:08 PM J . Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 04:28:49PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 4:22 PM Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Looks good to me. Aside from the minor nit above: > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > I have one file locking patch queued up for v5.3 so far, but nothing for > > > v5.2. Miklos or Bruce, if either of you have anything to send to Linus > > > for v5.2 would you mind taking this one too? > > > > > > > Well. I did send a fix patch to Miklos for a bug introduced in v5.2-rc4, > > so... > > I could take it. I've modified it as below. > > I'm very happy with the patch, but not so much with the idea of 5.2 and > stable. > > It seems like a subtle change with some possibility of unintended side > effects. (E.g. I don't think this is true any more, but my memory is > that for a long time the only thing stopping nfsd from giving out > (probably broken) write delegations was an extra reference that it held > during processing.) And if the overlayfs bug's been there since 4.19, > then waiting a little longer seems OK? > Getting back to this now that the patch is on its way to Linus. Bruce, I was fine with waiting to 5.3 and I also removed CC: stable, but did you mean that patch is not appropriate for stable or just that we'd better wait a bit and let it soak in master before forwarding it to stable? Thanks, Amir.
