On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 03:41:27PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 9:09 PM Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 08:10:16AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> As someone who has done xfs stable backports for a while I really don't
> think the autoselection is helpful at
On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 9:09 PM Greg KH wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 08:10:16AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > As someone who has done xfs stable backports for a while I really don't
> > think the autoselection is helpful at all.
>
> autoselection for xfs patches has been turned off for
On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 08:10:16AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> As someone who has done xfs stable backports for a while I really don't
> think the autoselection is helpful at all.
autoselection for xfs patches has been turned off for a while, what
triggered this email thread was a core vfs p
As someone who has done xfs stable backports for a while I really don't
think the autoselection is helpful at all. Someone who is vaguely
familiar with the code needs to manually select the commits and QA them,
which takes a fair amount of time, but just needs some manual help if it
should work ok
On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 11:09:05AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>> It's getting to the point that with the amount of known issues with XFS
>> on LTS kernels it makes sense to mark it as CONFIG_BROKEN.
>
>Really? Where are the bug reports?
In 'git log'! You report these every time you fix somethi
> >> It's getting to the point that with the amount of known issues with XFS
> >> on LTS kernels it makes sense to mark it as CONFIG_BROKEN.
> >
> >Really? Where are the bug reports?
>
> In 'git log'! You report these every time you fix something in upstream
> xfs but don't backport it to stable tr
6 matches
Mail list logo
