On 2/17/21 9:26 PM, Greg KH wrote: > A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post > Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting? > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? > A: Top-posting. > Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? > > A: No. > Q: Should I include quotations after my reply? > > http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top Sorry for the inconvenience. I reply in the topmost because I reply to the email of myself and want to discuss something overall, i.e. if this issue needs to be fixed in stable tree. > On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 09:12:38PM +0800, JeffleXu wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Would you please evaluate if these should be fixed in stable tree, at >> least for the virtio-blk scenario [1] ? > > What is "these"? I think I have clarified in the previous mail [1]. And yes it was already one week ago and the context seems a little confusing here. Sorry for that. In short, the symlink file '/dev/disk/by-id/XXXX' can't be created for virtio-blk devices, which could be fixed by [2]. > >> [1] commit e982c4d0a29b1d61fbe7716a8dcf8984936d6730 ("virtio-blk: >> modernize sysfs attribute creation") > > Do you want this backported? Yes, better to have it backported. I can maintain the fix as a private patch in my 4.19 repository. I request to backport it into 4.19 stable tree, bacause I think 4.19 stable tree may also suffers this issue. > To where? At least 4.19 stable tree, though all code previous 4.20 may also suffers, since this is fixed in 4.20 upstream. > Why? Explained in [1]. > If so, where is the working backport that you have properly tested? I want to backport the upstream patch (commit fef912bf860e and e982c4d0a29b). Sasha ever picked up another patch ([3]) from the same upstream patch set [4], and manually reorganized a little. The reason is explained in [5]. These two patches (commit fef912bf860e and e982c4d0a29b) could be directly applied to 4.19 stable tree. But to backport these two patches, like Sasha said in [5], we need to revert the previous patch that Sasha backported, and apply the upstream version. I'm not sure if I shall send the patch (since I'm not the author of the upstream patch), or the maintainer apply the patch directly. [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/stable/msg442203.html [2] commit e982c4d0a29b1d61fbe7716a8dcf8984936d6730 ("virtio-blk: modernize sysfs attribute creation") [3] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-block/patch/20180905070053.26239-5-hare@xxxxxxx/ [4] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-block/cover/20180905070053.26239-1-hare@xxxxxxx/ [5] https://www.spinics.net/lists/stable/msg442196.html -- Thanks, Jeffle
