From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF798C04EB8 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 06:48:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89F1B2086D for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 06:48:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1544597325; bh=O2Uz3IU0n9VkF3JZ/PYrXWTL3dfkuqsi1wqgU+RGnzs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=KSUAuBPFVUCSizLD4v4HmULu3aW/SZhwWnfjxaOh6z1GEpcTJJD3/L681J2fmj3D/ NjfdyhuvbkogVBJxBlYFQQ8C+GGIBCu2WBwKDfhgdaV20DJ1P8YJw8lAK5phmYm80i AZra0Ac7b248pf8V49BXY4kTYdNR1VuQx2BSKwTw= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 89F1B2086D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726544AbeLLGso (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2018 01:48:44 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:47234 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726242AbeLLGso (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2018 01:48:44 -0500 Received: from localhost (c-73-47-72-35.hsd1.nh.comcast.net [73.47.72.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DE94F2084E; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 06:48:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1544597323; bh=O2Uz3IU0n9VkF3JZ/PYrXWTL3dfkuqsi1wqgU+RGnzs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=E+KkutIN1qAa65rSNo00Kk2YjOmHOGre8B3GqX2LAz3c2844PE6H6g6Kl53dgvzj9 pl9qdAVx+mLONDTBKgzrMpA/rfkQDnJKYW5oX9US6JSoIccFIY5mgtO8rS69dWKIzM T8mEFzVRTmbZPDsuJSYXTsvSZWNO4cUDu2y6X40Y= Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 01:48:42 -0500 From: Sasha Levin To: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: Daniel Wang , Petr Mladek , Steven Rostedt , stable@vger.kernel.org, Alexander.Levin@microsoft.com, Andrew Morton , byungchul.park@lge.com, dave.hansen@intel.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Mathieu Desnoyers , Mel Gorman , mhocko@kernel.org, pavel@ucw.cz, penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp, Peter Zijlstra , tj@kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , vbabka@suse.cz, Cong Wang , Peter Feiner Subject: Re: 4.14 backport request for dbdda842fe96f: "printk: Add console owner and waiter logic to load balance console writes" Message-ID: <20181212064841.GB2746@sasha-vm> References: <20181004083609.kcziz2ynwi2w7lcm@pathway.suse.cz> <20181004085515.GC12879@jagdpanzerIV> <20181022100952.GA1147@jagdpanzerIV> <20181109064740.GE599@jagdpanzerIV> <20181212052126.GF431@jagdpanzerIV> <20181212062841.GI431@jagdpanzerIV> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181212062841.GI431@jagdpanzerIV> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 03:28:41PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: >On (12/11/18 22:08), Daniel Wang wrote: >> >> I've been meaning to try it but kept getting distracted by other >> things. I'll try to find some time for it this week or next. Right now >> my intent is to get Steven's patch into 4.14 stable as it evidently >> fixed the particular issue I was seeing, and as Steven said it has >> been in upstream since 4.16 so it's not like backporting it will raise >> any red flags. I will start another thread on -stable for it. > >OK. > >> > I guess we still don't have a really clear understanding of what exactly >> is going in your system >> >> I would also like to get to the bottom of it. Unfortunately I haven't >> got the expertise in this area nor the time to do it yet. Hence the >> intent to take a step back and backport Steven's patch to fix the >> issue that has resurfaced in our production recently. > >No problem. >I just meant that -stable people can be a bit "unconvinced". The -stable people tried adding this patch back in April, but ended up getting complaints up the wazoo (https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/9/154) about how this is not -stable material. So yes, testing/acks welcome :) -- Thanks, Sasha