lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Feb]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.1 12/21] fs/super.c: stop calling fscrypt_destroy_keyring() from __put_super()
    On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 11:24:36AM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
    >On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 09:30:37PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
    >> On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 08:07:55PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
    >> > On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 10:42:47PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
    >> > > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
    >> > >
    >> > > [ Upstream commit ec64036e68634231f5891faa2b7a81cdc5dcd001 ]
    >> > >
    >> > > Now that the key associated with the "test_dummy_operation" mount option
    >> > > is added on-demand when it's needed, rather than immediately when the
    >> > > filesystem is mounted, fscrypt_destroy_keyring() no longer needs to be
    >> > > called from __put_super() to avoid a memory leak on mount failure.
    >> > >
    >> > > Remove this call, which was causing confusion because it appeared to be
    >> > > a sleep-in-atomic bug (though it wasn't, for a somewhat-subtle reason).
    >> > >
    >> > > Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
    >> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230208062107.199831-5-ebiggers@kernel.org
    >> > > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
    >> >
    >> > Why is this being backported?
    >> >
    >> > - Eric
    >>
    >> BTW, can you please permanently exclude all commits authored by me from AUTOSEL
    >> so that I don't have to repeatedly complain about every commit individually?
    >> Especially when these mails often come on weekends and holidays.

    Yup, no problem - I'll ignore any commits authored by you.

    >> I know how to use Cc stable, and how to ask explicitly for a stable backport if
    >> I find out after the fact that one is needed. (And other real people can always
    >> ask too... not counting AUTOSEL, even though you are sending the AUTOSEL emails,
    >> since clearly they go through no or very little human review.)

    One of the challanges here is that it's difficult to solicit reviews or
    really any interaction from authors after a commit lands upstream. Look
    at the response rates to Greg's "FAILED" emails that ask authors to
    provide backports to commits they tagged for stable.

    >> Of course, it's not just me that AUTOSEL isn't working for. So, you'll still
    >> continue backporting random commits that I have to spend hours bisecting, e.g.
    >> https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20220921155332.234913-7-sashal@kernel.org.
    >>
    >> But at least I won't have to deal with this garbage for my own commits.
    >>
    >> Now, I'm not sure I'll get a response to this --- I received no response to my
    >> last AUTOSEL question at
    >> https://lore.kernel.org/stable/Y1DTFiP12ws04eOM@sol.localdomain. So to
    >> hopefully entice you to actually do something, I'm also letting you know that I
    >> won't be reviewing any AUTOSEL mails for my commits anymore.
    >>
    >
    >The really annoying thing is that someone even replied to your AUTOSEL email for
    >that broken patch and told you it is broken
    >(https://lore.kernel.org/stable/d91aaff1-470f-cfdf-41cf-031eea9d6aca@mailbox.org),
    >and ***you ignored it and applied the patch anyway***.
    >
    >Why are you even sending these emails if you are ignoring feedback anyway?

    I obviously didn't ignore it on purpose, right?

    --
    Thanks,
    Sasha

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2023-03-27 00:37    [W:2.852 / U:0.228 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site