Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 26 Jan 2022 13:06:59 +0530
From:   Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc:     fstests <fstests@vger.kernel.org>, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
        Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@huawei.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        chenlong <chenlongcl.chen@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/1] ext4/054: Should we remove auto and quick group?
Message-ID: <20220126073659.zo2znw273jr6i6rs@riteshh-domain>
References: <cover.1643089143.git.riteshh@linux.ibm.com>
 <YfBY2pMmEFPb+qCF@mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YfBY2pMmEFPb+qCF@mit.edu>
Precedence: bulk

On 22/01/25 03:08PM, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 11:32:01AM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> > Hello Zhang/Ted,
> >
> > Looks like the issue fixed by patches at [1], were observed with fault injection
> > testing and with errors=continue mount option. But were not cc'd to stable.
> >
> > Do you think those should be cc'd to stable tree?
>
> I already requested that they be backported, and they are in 5.10.89+
> and 5.15.12+.  Unfortunately the patches don't backport cleanly into
> 5.4, and while I did the manual backport for 5.10, I haven't gotten
> around to backporting them into 5.4 or older kernels.
>

Sure Ted, thanks a lot for the backport and for providing above information.

-ritesh