linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] bcache changes for 3.17

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140905183301.GB17903@daterainc.com>
Date:	Fri, 5 Sep 2014 11:33:01 -0700
From:	Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>
To:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:	Arne Wiebalck <Arne.Wiebalck@...n.ch>,
	Peter Kieser <peter@...ser.ca>,
	"eddie@...k.net" <eddie@...k.net>,
	Francis Moreau <francis.moro@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org" <linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org>,
	stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] bcache changes for 3.17

On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 11:10:13AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 09/05/2014 11:03 AM, Arne Wiebalck wrote:
> > 
> > On Sep 5, 2014, at 6:41 PM, Peter Kieser <peter@...ser.ca>
> >  wrote:
> > 
> >>
> >> On 2014-09-05 8:37 AM, Eddie Chapman wrote:
> >>> On 05/09/14 15:17, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>>> (from oldest to newest). And that's just from 3.16 to 3.17-rc3, going
> >>>> all the way back to 3.10 would be a lot of work. If there's anyone that
> >>>> cares about bcache on stable kernels (and actually use it), now would be
> >>>> a good time to pipe up.
> >>>
> >>> Just "piping up" as I care about bcache and actually use it in production on 3.10! Shame I don't have the knowledge to try and backport these though :-)
> >>>
> >>> Eddie
> >>
> >> I'm "piping up" as well, I use bcache on 3.10 in production.
> >>
> >> -Peter
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > More "piping up": we currently use bcache on a few nodes in production, on 3.14 and 3.15, and plan to roll it out on a wider scale now.
> > If necessary we'll go with these kernels, but we'd certainly prefer our usual 3.10-based CentOS kernel.
> 
> OK, so we definitely have people using it in production. My concern was
> that whomever does the backport of the appropriate patches to 3.10/14/15
> stable would have an audience for getting some amount of testing of such
> a patch series.
> 
> Now we just need someone to line up to do the work...

I can try and make some time for backporting; if we've got people lined up for
testing that will help a lot.

Backporting fixes to 3.10 will be harder, but if memory serves there hasn't been
as much churn since 3.14 so backporting fixes to then shouldn't be too bad. If
Stefan wants to post what he's got for 3.10 though I can try and backport some
more fixes on top of that, though
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/