Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 3 Sep 2019 14:53:54 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc:     Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: "fs/namei.c: keep track of nd->root refcount status" causes boot
 panic
Message-ID: <20190903135354.GI1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <7C6CCE98-1E22-433C-BF70-A3CBCDED4635@lca.pw>
 <20190903123719.GF1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20190903130456.GA9567@infradead.org>
 <20190903134832.GH1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20190903135024.GA8274@infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190903135024.GA8274@infradead.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.0 (2019-05-25)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 06:50:24AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 02:48:32PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > Not sure what would be the best way to do it...  I don't mind breaking
> > the out-of-tree modules, whatever their license is; what I would rather
> > avoid is _quiet_ breaking of such.
> 
> Any out of tree module running against an upstream kernel will need
> a recompile for a new version anyway.  So I would not worry about it
> at all.

There's much nastier situation than "new upstream kernel released,
need to rebuild" - it's bisect in mainline trying to locate something...