On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 11:57:59AM -0500, Neal Cardwell wrote: > On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.74 release. > > There are 75 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > > let me know. > > > > Responses should be made by Wed Jan 3 14:00:03 UTC 2018. > > Anything received after that time might be too late. > > > > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at: > > kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.9.74-rc1.gz > > or in the git tree and branch at: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.9.y > > and the diffstat can be found below. > > Hi Greg, > > In looking at the 4.9 and 4.14 patches yesterday, I noticed there were > two TCP BBR fixes that made it into 4.14 but not 4.9. Doing an > inventory of the TCP BBR fixes, AFAICT we have: > > c589e69b508d tcp_bbr: record "full bw reached" decision in new > full_bw_reached bit > - in 4.9 and 4.14 (great) > > 2f6c498e4f15 tcp_bbr: reset full pipe detection on loss recovery undo > - in 4.14 (but not 4.9) > > 600647d467c6 tcp_bbr: reset long-term bandwidth sampling on loss recovery undo > - in 4.14 (but not 4.9) > > Lacking the second and third patches in 4.9 will not cause any new > problems, but it will miss out on some nice fixes. If it's possible to > get 2f6c498e4f15 and 600647d467c6 either into 4.9.74 or 4.9.75, I > would be very grateful. I go with the set of backported patches from DaveM, so I just assume he didn't include these in the 4.9 set of patches for a good reason. You can ask on netdev@ about this and cc: me, to make it go a bit faster, if I get an ACK from DaveM, I can queue them up directly. thanks, greg k-h