On 2/3/23 2:17 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 08:50:20AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 1/16/23 8:44 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> On 1/16/23 7:49 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 07:13:40AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>> On 1/16/23 6:42 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>>> On 1/16/23 6:17?AM, Linux kernel regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: >>>>>>> Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I noticed a regression report in bugzilla.kernel.org. As many (most?) >>>>>>> kernel developer don't keep an eye on it, I decided to forward it by >>>>>>> mail. Quoting from https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216932 : >>>>>> >>>>>> Looks like: >>>>>> >>>>>> commit 6d47e0f6a535701134d950db65eb8fe1edf0b575 >>>>>> Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> Date: Wed Jan 4 08:52:06 2023 -0700 >>>>>> >>>>>> block: don't allow splitting of a REQ_NOWAIT bio >>>>>> >>>>>> got picked up by stable, but not the required prep patch: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> commit 613b14884b8595e20b9fac4126bf627313827fbe >>>>>> Author: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> Date: Wed Jan 4 08:51:19 2023 -0700 >>>>>> >>>>>> block: handle bio_split_to_limits() NULL return >>>>>> >>>>>> Greg/team, can you pick the latter too? It'll pick cleanly for >>>>>> 6.1-stable, not sure how far back the other patch has gone yet. >>>>> >>>>> Looked back, and 5.15 has it too, but the cherry-pick won't work >>>>> on that kernel. >>>>> >>>>> Here's one for 5.15-stable that I verified crashes before this one, >>>>> and works with it. Haven't done an allmodconfig yet... >>>> >>>> All now queued up, thanks! >>> >>> Thanks Greg! This one was my fault, as it was a set of 2 patches and >>> I only marked 2/2 for stable. But how is that best handled? 1/2 could've >>> been marked stable as well, but I don't think that would have prevented >>> 2/2 applying fine and 1/2 failing and hence not getting queued up until >>> I would've done a backport. >>> >>> What's the recommended way to describe the dependency that you only >>> want 2/2 applied when 1/2 is in as well? >> >> What I'm asking is if we have something like Depends-on or similar >> that would explain this dependency. Then patch 2/2 could have: >> >> Depends-on: 613b14884b85 ("block: handle bio_split_to_limits() NULL return") >> >> and then it'd be clear that either both get added, or none of them. > > As per the documentation, you can put this on the cc: stable line in the > changelog text like: > cc: stable <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 613b14884b85 Gotcha, will try and remember that :-) -- Jens Axboe
