Hello,
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 3:34 AM, Chen Gang <[email protected]> wrote:
> additional information:
> before commit 01c681d4c70d64cb72142a2823f27c4146a02e63, the value printed
> here was bogus, as it was the guest provided value from req->u.rw.handle
> rather than the actual device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
Sorry I'm a bit late but since since 01c681d is in stable, I guess
a72d900 (xen/xen-blkback: preq.dev is used without initialized)
could be added in stable as well.
Am I wrong? otherwise I'm ok to do the request.
Regards,
--
William
>>> On 03.04.13 at 14:56, William Dauchy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 3:34 AM, Chen Gang <[email protected]> wrote:
>> additional information:
>> before commit 01c681d4c70d64cb72142a2823f27c4146a02e63, the value printed
>> here was bogus, as it was the guest provided value from req->u.rw.handle
>> rather than the actual device.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <[email protected]>
>> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
>
> Sorry I'm a bit late but since since 01c681d is in stable, I guess
> a72d900 (xen/xen-blkback: preq.dev is used without initialized)
> could be added in stable as well.
> Am I wrong? otherwise I'm ok to do the request.
Iirc we requested the earlier commit to be removed from stable
trees, and I think Greg also did so.
Jan
Hello Jan,
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jan Beulich <[email protected]> wrote:
> Iirc we requested the earlier commit to be removed from stable
> trees, and I think Greg also did so.
I'm sorry but I'm unable to find a revert of 01c681d in stable tree.
Regards,
--
William
>>> On 03.04.13 at 15:25, William Dauchy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jan Beulich <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Iirc we requested the earlier commit to be removed from stable
>> trees, and I think Greg also did so.
>
> I'm sorry but I'm unable to find a revert of 01c681d in stable tree.
ChangeLog-3.8.3 for example has
commit 32f4d10ed8fd7ef4cebbf02c5326e8bb6aeca9b1
Author: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
Date: Tue Mar 12 15:08:26 2013 -0700
Revert "xen/blkback: Don't trust the handle from the frontend."
This reverts commit 01c681d4c70d64cb72142a2823f27c4146a02e63 upstream
(ef56ca64ea733c3b88f0bb74b04da128b1dc35d8 in this tree), as it wasn't
supposed to have been applied to the stable tree.
Cc: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
Cc: Ian Campbell <[email protected]>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
Jan
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Jan Beulich <[email protected]> wrote:
> ChangeLog-3.8.3 for example has
oh sorry, you are right. I wasn't looking is the 3.8.x branch.
The thing is, the revert seems present only in 3.8.x branch. For
example in 3.4.x the last patch is still 01c681d
Should we consider this normal or is it a mistake?
--
William
>>> On 03.04.13 at 15:56, William Dauchy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Jan Beulich <[email protected]> wrote:
>> ChangeLog-3.8.3 for example has
>
> oh sorry, you are right. I wasn't looking is the 3.8.x branch.
> The thing is, the revert seems present only in 3.8.x branch. For
> example in 3.4.x the last patch is still 01c681d
> Should we consider this normal or is it a mistake?
I think it is a mistake, but ultimately it's Konrad's call.
Jan
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 03:34:16PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 03.04.13 at 15:56, William Dauchy <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Jan Beulich <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> ChangeLog-3.8.3 for example has
> >
> > oh sorry, you are right. I wasn't looking is the 3.8.x branch.
> > The thing is, the revert seems present only in 3.8.x branch. For
> > example in 3.4.x the last patch is still 01c681d
> > Should we consider this normal or is it a mistake?
>
> I think it is a mistake, but ultimately it's Konrad's call.
It is a mistake. Please revert it if possible.
>
> Jan
>