On Sun, Mar 10, 2024 at 09:19:09AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > On Sun, Mar 10, 2024 at 04:26:14AM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 09, 2024 at 09:32:15PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled > > > > > > readahead: avoid multiple marked readahead pages > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZdUUMQOoGtZkyYVO@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > Why do I have to tell both you *and* Greg? > > Still haven't completed my mind-meld with Greg, sorry. You don't share a list of patches which have been NAKed for backport? That seems like a useful bit of process to improve. > But more seriously, I'm going through all the stable tagged commits that > are in limbo given 6.8 will be released later today. > > I don't see a revert or a fix for the commit in question, which means > that the reported regression will go into the 6.8 final release, which > we will be asking people to switch to. > > If it's not good enough for stable, why is it good enough for 6.8? Pardon me for prioritising fixing a memory corruption bug over a performance regression. There's only so many hours in the day.
