linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.4 72/88] block: dont deal with discard limit in blkdev_issue

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20190111150605.GA10771@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 11 Jan 2019 10:06:05 -0500
From:   Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Ming Lin <ming.l@....samsung.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Xiao Ni <xni@...hat.com>,
        Mariusz Dabrowski <mariusz.dabrowski@...el.com>,
        Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 72/88] block: dont deal with discard limit in
 blkdev_issue_discard()

On Fri, Jan 11 2019 at  9:35am -0500,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 09:25:39AM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 11 2019 at  9:08am -0500,
> > Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > 4.4-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> > > 
> > > ------------------
> > > 
> > > From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
> > > 
> > > commit 744889b7cbb56a64f957e65ade7cb65fe3f35714 upstream.
> > 
> > Hi Greg,
> > 
> > Please also pick up this commit:
> > 89f5fa47476eda56402e29fff3c5097f5c2a1e19 ("dm: call blk_queue_split() to
> > impose device limits on bios")
> 
> That's going to be hard as the dependancy for that patch is not here in
> 4.4.y, and this patch itself isn't even in anything older than 4.19.y.

Right, I quickly replied to this thread with followup of the 3 prereq
patches needed to get 89f5fa47476 to apply.

> So why add it here to 4.4.y only?

Because you're looking to pull in a commit into 4.4 that causes problems
elsewhere.
 
> Can you send the needed patch series to the stable@ mailing list for the
> different stable trees if this needs to get into them?

I'll try to get to that, but it is low priority for me.  And in the
meantime.. DM will be broken in 4.4 if you take 744889b7cb.. wheeeee.

Mike