On 7/14/2022 10:07 PM, Chuck Zmudzinski wrote: > On 7/14/2022 1:30 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > > Sorry, have to ask: is this supposed to finally fix this regression? > > https://lore.kernel.org/regressions/YnHK1Z3o99eMXsVK@mail-itl/ > > Yes that's the first report I saw to lkml about this isssue. Hi Thorsten, Actually, now I realize that was not the first report to lkml about this issue, although it *was* the first report to the regressions mailing list. Actually, the first report to lkml about this issue was Jan's patch that will hopefully soon make it to linux-next and mainline. So the proper Link: tag for this issue in the actual patch to be committed to the mainline kernel is to Jan's patch that was originally posted to lkml before any user reported it to the regressions mailing list. To know there was a regression from Jan's original patch, one would need to have read his commit message since he did not actually report it as a regression to the regressions mailing list at that time, nor did he identify a culprit commit at that time. Bottom line: everything seems OK right now because the patch moving towards mainline does have the correct Link: tag. Thanks for all the work you have done on this regression. Best regards, Chuck
