[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YmXwMUdka3m01hUV@sashalap>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2022 20:49:53 -0400
From: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: Klaus Jensen <its@...elevant.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>, axboe@...com,
linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.10 18/18] nvme-pci: disable namespace
identifiers for Qemu controllers
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 11:52:36AM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 02:13:52PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
>>
>> [ Upstream commit 66dd346b84d79fde20832ed691a54f4881eac20d ]
>>
>> Qemu unconditionally reports a UUID, which depending on the qemu version
>> is either all-null (which is incorrect but harmless) or contains a single
>> bit set for all controllers. In addition it can also optionally report
>> a eui64 which needs to be manually set. Disable namespace identifiers
>> for Qemu controlles entirely even if in some cases they could be set
>> correctly through manual intervention.
>>
>> Reported-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
>> Reviewed-by: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
>> Reviewed-by: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
>> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
>
>Huh? The NVME_QUIRK_BOGUS_NID is a new define and the code which uses
>this quirk is also new, and so I'm curious *how and why* the auto-sel
>stuff for stable can decide to merge this and this should not even
>compile? I see this was backported to v5.15 and v5.17 as well.
Because we take quirks for -stable?
It does compile apparently... At least with the configs we test.
>I didn't get Cc'd on perhaps some other patches, but this immediately
>caught my attention as not applicable, unless of course the patch
>"nvme: add a quirk to disable namespace identifiers" was also sent
>as part of this series to stable kernels. And if that was done, well
>holy crap, really?
Yes, it was.
I'm not sure why we shouldn't be picking it up?
--
Thanks,
Sasha
Powered by blists - more mailing lists