> But, I really want to know why people are still trying to use the 4.4 > kernel right now for a "general purpose" system. They should be using > 4.9 at the very least by now, 4.4 is not a good idea at all. Why can > you not just move your users to 4.9 instead of a newer 4.4 kernel? It > should be the exact same, right? > greg k-h Sorry about this. Maybe you don't believe this, we are just upgrading to 4.4 kernel from 3.2. I can do nothing for this.... But certainly, we are not a completely "general purpose" Linux. On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:40 AM Dexuan Cui <decui@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > From: 'gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 06:55 > > > ... > > > This is to say, we're requesting a backport of 4 patches or 28 patches. > > > If 28 patches seem too many, we hope at least the 4 patches can be > > backported. > > > > 28 seems odd, there's lots of things in there that you do not need. > Yes, some of the 28 patches are completely unnecessary for a "stable" kernel, > but some are fixes for other known issues. Only backporting the minimal > amount of the patches can't work due to merge conflicts, so I generated > the 28-patch list which can be applied cleanly in order. > > > So 4 is good, can you send all 4 as a patch series, properly backported > > and tested with this patch as the last one? > I'm OK with only backporting the 4 patches for this particular issue > reported by Wang Jian. Maybe we can backport more fixes in future > if people report new KVP issues against the 4.4 kernel. > > So I'm going to send all the 4 patches as a patch series. Wang Jian > has tested them. > > > But, I really want to know why people are still trying to use the 4.4 > > kernel right now for a "general purpose" system. They should be using > > 4.9 at the very least by now, 4.4 is not a good idea at all. Why can > > you not just move your users to 4.9 instead of a newer 4.4 kernel? It > > should be the exact same, right? > > greg k-h > > We definitely encourage users to use new kernels like 4.9 and 4.1x, but it > looks some users have to use their customized 4.4 kernels due to some > reason I don't know (believe it or not, except Wang Jian, I have made > the same private backport twice for two companies since July). > > And Ubuntu 16.04.5 LTS (http://releases.ubuntu.com/16.04/), which is > based on v4.4, also has the same KVP bug: > http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git/ubuntu/ubuntu-xenial.git/tree/Makefile?h=Ubuntu-4.4.0-137.163 > And I did receive a bug report from a Ubuntu user last week. > > Ubuntu 16.04 will reach End-of-Life on April 2021 -- still 2.5 years left > since now. So I hope after the 4 patches are merged into the upstream > 4.4.y branch, the Ubuntu guys will notice them and pick them up. > > Thanks, > -- Dexuan > -- Regards, Wang Jian
