On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 2:24 PM Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 09:30:37PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 08:07:55PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 10:42:47PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > [ Upstream commit ec64036e68634231f5891faa2b7a81cdc5dcd001 ] > > > > > > > > Now that the key associated with the "test_dummy_operation" mount option > > > > is added on-demand when it's needed, rather than immediately when the > > > > filesystem is mounted, fscrypt_destroy_keyring() no longer needs to be > > > > called from __put_super() to avoid a memory leak on mount failure. > > > > > > > > Remove this call, which was causing confusion because it appeared to be > > > > a sleep-in-atomic bug (though it wasn't, for a somewhat-subtle reason). > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230208062107.199831-5-ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Why is this being backported? > > > > > > - Eric > > > > BTW, can you please permanently exclude all commits authored by me from AUTOSEL > > so that I don't have to repeatedly complain about every commit individually? > > Especially when these mails often come on weekends and holidays. > > > > I know how to use Cc stable, and how to ask explicitly for a stable backport if > > I find out after the fact that one is needed. (And other real people can always > > ask too... not counting AUTOSEL, even though you are sending the AUTOSEL emails, > > since clearly they go through no or very little human review.) > > > > Of course, it's not just me that AUTOSEL isn't working for. So, you'll still > > continue backporting random commits that I have to spend hours bisecting, e.g. > > https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20220921155332.234913-7-sashal@xxxxxxxxxx. > > > > But at least I won't have to deal with this garbage for my own commits. > > > > Now, I'm not sure I'll get a response to this --- I received no response to my > > last AUTOSEL question at > > https://lore.kernel.org/stable/Y1DTFiP12ws04eOM@sol.localdomain. So to > > hopefully entice you to actually do something, I'm also letting you know that I > > won't be reviewing any AUTOSEL mails for my commits anymore. > > > > The really annoying thing is that someone even replied to your AUTOSEL email for > that broken patch and told you it is broken > (https://lore.kernel.org/stable/d91aaff1-470f-cfdf-41cf-031eea9d6aca@xxxxxxxxxxx), > and ***you ignored it and applied the patch anyway***. > > Why are you even sending these emails if you are ignoring feedback anyway? > > How do I even get you to not apply a patch? Is it even possible? > > I guess I might as well just add an email filter that auto-deletes all AUTOSEL > emails, as apparently there's no point in responding anyway? I test this branch for Greg but don't pay attention to these emails Sasha sends out (because there's just waaaaay too many of them to look through unless they get a reply; I find them quite annoying otherwise.) But if these commits automatically get applied to stable trees, even with objections from the committers, then I personally question the methodology for having AUTOSEL in the first place. Commits should be tested and backported with explicit purpose by their developers, IMO. -- Slade
