On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 04:15:11PM +0200, Jari Ruusu wrote: > Willy Tarreau wrote: > > The only set of fixes that can be trusted are the "official" stable > > kernels, because they are the only ones that are approved by the patches > > authors themselves. Adding more stuff on top of stable kernels is fine > > (and done at your own risk), but randomly dropping stuff from stable > > kernels just because you don't think you need that is totally non-sense > > and must not be done anymore! > > This may be little bit off-topic... but stable kernel.org kernels > can also bit-rot badly because of "selective" backporting... as in > anything that does not apply cleanly gets dropped regardless of > how critical they are. > > I will give you one example: Intel WiFi (iwlwifi) on 4.19.y > kernel.org stable kernels is currently missing many critical > locking fixes.
Why has no one asked for the specific upstream commits to be backported if this is the case? > As a result, that in-tree iwlwifi driver causes > erratic behavior to random unrelated processes, and has been doing > so for many months now. My not-so-politically correct opinion is > that in-tree iwlwifi is completely FUBAR unless someone steps up > to do professional quality backport of those locking fixes from > upstream out-of-tree Intel version [1] [2] of the driver. Why does any out-of-tree driver come into play here? What is wrong with the in-kernel code? > For me > only way to get properly working WiFi on my laptop computer is to > compile that Intel out-of-tree version. Sad, but true. Why use 4.19.y on a laptop in the firstplace? That feels very wrong and is not the recommended thing to use the LTS kernels for. thanks, greg k-h
