On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 08:02:23PM +0100, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023, Sasha Levin wrote:On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 07:16:52PM +0100, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > >On Wed, 29 Nov 2023, Sasha Levin wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 06:28:16PM +0100, Mikulas Patocka wrote: >> > >> > >> >On Wed, 29 Nov 2023, Christian Loehle wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Mikulas, >> >> Agreed and thanks for fixing. >> >> Has this been selected for stable because of: >> >> 6fc45b6ed921 ("dm-delay: fix a race between delay_presuspend and >> >> delay_bio") >> >> If so, I would volunteer do the backports for that for you at least. >> > >> >I wouldn't backport this patch - it is an enhancement, not a bugfix, so it >> >doesn't qualify for the stable kernel backports. >> >> Right - this watch was selected as a dependency for 6fc45b6ed921 >> ("dm-delay: fix a race between delay_presuspend and delay_bio"). >> >> In general, unless it's impractical, we'd rather take a dependency chain >> rather than deal with a non-trivial backport as those tend to have >> issues longer term. >> >> -- >> Thanks, >> Sasha > >The patch 70bbeb29fab0 ("dm delay: for short delays, use kthread instead >of timers and wq") changes behavior of dm-delay from using timers to >polling, so it may cause problems to people running legacy kernels - the >polling consumes more CPU time than the timers - so I think it shouldn't >go to the stable kernels where users expect that there will be no >functional change. > >Here I'm submitting the patch 6fc45b6ed921 backported for 6.6.3. Is this okay for 6.1 too?Yes, it is. It applies to kernels as old as 4.19.
Great, applied all the way back to 4.19. Thanks! -- Thanks, Sasha
