On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 04:53:12PM -0800, Song Liu wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 4:34 PM Dan Moulding <dan@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > For now, I'm going to keep both commits in the stable trees, as that
> > > matches what is in Linus's tree
> >
> > Please consider reverting bed9e27baf52 in both Linus' tree and the
> > stable trees. That would keep them in sync while keeping this new
> > regression out of the kernel.
> >
> > > as this seems to be hard to reproduce
> > > and I haven't seen any other reports of issues.
> >
> > The change that caused the regression itself purports to fix a
> > two-year old regression. But since that alleged regression has been in
> > the kernel for two years, seemingly without much (if any) public
> > complaint, I'd say that the new regression caused by bed9e27baf52 is
> > definitely the easier one to reproduce (I hit it within hours after
> > upgrading to 6.7.1).
>
> Agreed. I am thinking about reverting bed9e27baf52.
Ok, I've dropped d6e035aad6c0 ("md: bypass block throttle for superblock
update") from the stable queues right now, and I'll queue up the revert
posted as well.
If this gets straightened out in Linus's tree, and we need to take
anything into the stable trees, please let me know.
thanks,
greg k-h
