Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-120170-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <a123d813-bdef-202d-2980-fb74c5a715e5@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 09:18:01 +0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 033/238] md: implement ->set_read_only to hook into
 BLKROSET processing
To: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
 linux-raid <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>, Li Nan <linan666@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 stable@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
References: <20240324234027.1354210-1-sashal@kernel.org>
 <20240324234027.1354210-34-sashal@kernel.org> <20240325010435.GA23652@lst.de>
 <ZgFfc2b6VsX_QSu4@sashalap> <20240326074029.GB9773@lst.de>
 <CAPhsuW7FREFLrAnt2iYDRoJG0d=OXm-5vy3OCJ7MOJDp2SE9GQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Li Nan <linan666@huaweicloud.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPhsuW7FREFLrAnt2iYDRoJG0d=OXm-5vy3OCJ7MOJDp2SE9GQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


在 2024/3/26 16:46, Song Liu 写道:
> Hi Li Nan,
> 
> Could you please look into this (back port 9674f54e41ff to older stable
> kernels)? If there is no clean back port, I would recommend we not do
> the back port.
> 

There are some conflicts to back port, which are not related to the
modification of this patch. If necessary, let me know and I can adapt and
send it :)

> Thanks,
> Song
> 
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 12:40 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 07:26:43AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 02:04:35AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>>> How did we end up backporting all these block layer API changes?
>>>
>>> They were brought in as a dependency for 9674f54e41ff ("md: Don't clear
>>> MD_CLOSING when the raid is about to stop").
>>>
>>> It's possible to work around bringing them during backport, but I
>>> preferred to bring the dependencies instead.
>>
>> I really don't see what these giant backports bring us.  If people
>> want all the changes they'd just be better off on a modern kernel
>> rather than these frankenkernels.  The automatic backporting is
>> gettind way out of hand.  If the MD maintainers want
>> 9674f54e41ff, maybe they can send a tailor made backport?
> 
> .

-- 
Thanks,
Nan