Re: [PATCH 1/3] io-wq: add support for inheriting ->fs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

[This is an automated email]

This commit has been processed because it contains a -stable tag.
The stable tag indicates that it's relevant for the following trees: 5.3+

The bot has tested the following trees: v5.5.2, v5.4.18.

v5.5.2: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies:
    05f3fb3c5397 ("io_uring: avoid ring quiesce for fixed file set unregister and update")
    15b71abe7b52 ("io_uring: add support for IORING_OP_OPENAT")
    66f4af93da57 ("io_uring: add support for probing opcodes")
    b5dba59e0cf7 ("io_uring: add support for IORING_OP_CLOSE")
    d3656344fea0 ("io_uring: add lookup table for various opcode needs")
    d63d1b5edb7b ("io_uring: add support for fallocate()")
    eddc7ef52a6b ("io_uring: add support for IORING_OP_STATX")
    f86cd20c9454 ("io_uring: fix linked command file table usage")

v5.4.18: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies:
    561fb04a6a22 ("io_uring: replace workqueue usage with io-wq")
    771b53d033e8 ("io-wq: small threadpool implementation for io_uring")
    ba5290ccb6b5 ("io_uring: replace s->needs_lock with s->in_async")
    ba816ad61fdf ("io_uring: run dependent links inline if possible")
    c5def4ab8494 ("io-wq: add support for bounded vs unbunded work")
    c826bd7a743f ("io_uring: add set of tracing events")
    fcb323cc53e2 ("io_uring: io_uring: add support for async work inheriting files")


NOTE: The patch will not be queued to stable trees until it is upstream.

How should we proceed with this patch?

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux