On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 09:59:44AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 16.01.20 09:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 09:42:51AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > >> On 16.01.20 09:34, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > >>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 04:54:59PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> And why would 4.9 and 4.4 care about them? > >>>> > >>>> The crashes can be trigger under 4.9 and 4.4. If we decide that we do > >>>> not care, then this series can be dropped. > >>> > >>> Do we have users of memory hotplug that are somehow stuck at those old > >>> versions that can not upgrade? Obviously this didn't work previously > >>> for them, so moving to a modern kernel might be a good reason to get > >>> this new feature :) > >> > >> That's a good point - but usually when you experience a crash it's too > >> late for you to realize that you have to move to a newer release :) It > >> used to work before 4.4 IIRC. > >> > >> (one case I am concerned with is when memory onlining after memory > >> hotplug failed (e.g., because the was an OOM event happening > >> concurrently) - then memory hotunplug will crash your system.) > >> > >> But yeah, I am not aware of a report where somebody actually hit any of > >> these issues on a stable kernel. > > Just to clarify: I can reproduce them of course :) > > > > > Ok, let's start with 4.19 and 4.14 for these for now. Should make > > things easier, right? > > What do you mean with "start with"? Drop this series and not do the > backport, meaning people should switch to a stable kernel > 4.19 if they > don't want surprises on memory unplug? No, I'm saying I want to take this for 4.19, and 4.14 if you have it. But your original series you sent needs to be fixed up, I can't take it as-is for the authorship reasons. thanks, greg k-h
