Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-100418-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 18:14:38 +0300
From: Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@ispras.ru>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>, 
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, stable@vger.kernel.org, io-uring@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@ispras.ru>, 
	lvc-project@linuxtesting.org, Nikita Zhandarovich <n.zhandarovich@fintech.ru>, 
	Roman Belyaev <belyaevrd@yandex.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10/5.15] io_uring: fix registered files leak
Message-ID: <466e842f-66c6-4530-8c16-2b008fc3fbc6-pchelkin@ispras.ru>
References: <20240312142313.3436-1-pchelkin@ispras.ru>
 <8a9993c7-fd4d-44ff-8971-af59c7f3052c@kernel.dk>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8a9993c7-fd4d-44ff-8971-af59c7f3052c@kernel.dk>

On 24/03/12 08:34AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 3/12/24 8:23 AM, Fedor Pchelkin wrote:

[...]

> > I feel io_uring-SCM related code should be dropped entirely from the
> > stable branches as the backports already differ greatly between versions
> > and some parts are still kept, some have been dropped in a non-consistent
> > order. Though this might contradict with stable kernel rules or be
> > inappropriate for some other reason.
> 
> Looks fine to me, and I agree, it makes much more sense to drop it all
> from 5.10/5.15-stable as well to keep them in sync with upstream. And I
> think this is fine for stable, dropping code is always a good thing.
> 

Alright, got it. So that would require dropping it from all of the
supported 5.4, 6.1, 6.6, 6.7, too.

Would it be okay if I'll send this as a series?

--
Fedor