From: Theodore Ts'o Subject: Re: why has "fix ext4_ext_remove_space tree traversal" not been applied? Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 08:17:51 -0500 Message-ID: <20121106131751.GA3242@thunk.org> References: <20632.64737.272834.202562@fisica.ufpr.br> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Carlos Carvalho Return-path: Received: from li9-11.members.linode.com ([67.18.176.11]:59612 "EHLO imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751557Ab2KFNSA (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2012 08:18:00 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20632.64737.272834.202562@fisica.ufpr.br> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 10:04:49AM -0200, Carlos Carvalho wrote: > In 3.6.6 some of the patches of the series "Bunch of DIO/AIO fixes V4" > by Dmitry Monakhov have been applied but not all. In particular, patch > 9, "fix ext4_ext_remove_space tree traversal" is not there. We're > getting hit by the null pointer dereference in our main file servers. > > What's the situation of this patch? Any reason it's not applied? Patches which which change a large amount of code don't get the cc:stable@vger.kernel.org label applied to them, primarily because of the risk involved and the likelihood that those patches won't easily get backported to the older stable kernels. Keep in mind that the way things work is that patches that are tagged for the stable kernel tree automatically get cherry-picked, and if the cherry-pick fails, the patch is dropped. For a complex patch series, sometimes dropping a patch in the middle of the patch series can lead to really bad results --- and while I do extensive regression testing on the mainline kernel before I send a PULL request to Linus, I just don't have the time or energy to do this with the (many) stable kernels series. Enterprise distro's have paid people who do this thankless job, and it can be quite painful at times to support an old stable kernel, especially when users are using it in production and they will scream bloody murder if you introduce a regression. So they generally solve the problem by not sticking with a very old patch, and not giving users access to the latest and greatest features --- such as the punch hole feature. The problem is that users want the latest and greatest features, right away, but they also want something is absolutely stable and bug-free(tm). Unfortunately, sometimes both wants can not be accomodated... - Ted