On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 09:31:06AM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote: > On 08/10/2014 09:54 AM, Peter Kieser wrote: > > > > On 2014-08-05 9:58 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: > >> On 08/04/2014 10:33 PM, Kent Overstreet wrote: > >>> Hey Jens, here's the pull request for 3.17 - typically late, but lots of tasty > >>> fixes in this one :) > >> Normally I'd say no, but since it's basically just fixes, I guess we can > >> pull it in. But generally, it has to be in my hands a week before this, > >> so it can simmer a bit in for-next before going in... > >> > > Are these fixes going to be backported to 3.10 or other stable releases? > > > > Could you please answer this question ? > > If you don't want to maintain bcache for stable kernels (I can > understand that), can you mark it at least as unstable/experimental > stuff since it really is ? WTF? Just because a maintainer/developer doesn't want to do anything for the stable kernel releases does _NOT_ mean the code is "unstable/expreimental" at all. That's not how stable kernel releases work. _IF_ a maintainer wants to / has the time to, they can mark patches for inclusion in stable kernel releases. Given the huge list of patches that Jens just posted, I doubt that those are really something I would ever take for a stable kernel release. Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt for more details please. And don't ask others to do backporting work for you, it's not ok, and is something that I have always said is never required, and is not going to be. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html