Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:27:16AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.36 release. > There are 21 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:27:16AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.36 release. > There are 21 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On 11/30/2016 02:27 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.36 release. > There are 21 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. > > Responses

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On 11/30/2016 02:27 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.36 release. > There are 21 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. > > Responses

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 09:50:42AM -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Greg Kroah-Hartman > Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 14:53:27 +0100 > > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 02:46:19PM +0100, Andre Noll wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 30, 10:27, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote > >> > >> >

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 09:50:42AM -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Greg Kroah-Hartman > Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 14:53:27 +0100 > > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 02:46:19PM +0100, Andre Noll wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 30, 10:27, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote > >> > >> > Responses should be made by Fri Dec

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 09:53, David Miller wrote > > OK, thanks for the clarification. There is no hurry, I just wanted to > > make sure the patch doesn't get lost. > > There is never any ambiguity or guessing for networking patches, you > can always simply check right here to see if a networking patch

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 09:53, David Miller wrote > > OK, thanks for the clarification. There is no hurry, I just wanted to > > make sure the patch doesn't get lost. > > There is never any ambiguity or guessing for networking patches, you > can always simply check right here to see if a networking patch

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

From: Andre Noll Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 15:04:38 +0100 > On Wed, Nov 30, 14:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote >> > It fixes a regression introduced in 4.4.34 which makes systems >> > unbootable for us. We are currently running that patch on top of >> > 4.4.35 and I can confirm

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

From: Andre Noll Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 15:04:38 +0100 > On Wed, Nov 30, 14:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote >> > It fixes a regression introduced in 4.4.34 which makes systems >> > unbootable for us. We are currently running that patch on top of >> > 4.4.35 and I can confirm that it fixes the

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

From: Greg Kroah-Hartman Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 14:53:27 +0100 > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 02:46:19PM +0100, Andre Noll wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 30, 10:27, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote >> >> > Responses should be made by Fri Dec 2 09:26:46 UTC 2016. >> >> If you haven't

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

From: Greg Kroah-Hartman Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 14:53:27 +0100 > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 02:46:19PM +0100, Andre Noll wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 30, 10:27, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote >> >> > Responses should be made by Fri Dec 2 09:26:46 UTC 2016. >> >> If you haven't done so already, could you

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 06:28:58AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote: > Sure, this patch must definitely go in 4.4 And 4.8-stable, right? thanks, greg k-h

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 06:28:58AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote: > Sure, this patch must definitely go in 4.4 And 4.8-stable, right? thanks, greg k-h

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

Sure, this patch must definitely go in 4.4 Also worth noting that you could also use a module for your NIC as a work around. On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:04 AM, Andre Noll wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 14:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote >> > It fixes a regression introduced in

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

Sure, this patch must definitely go in 4.4 Also worth noting that you could also use a module for your NIC as a work around. On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:04 AM, Andre Noll wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 14:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote >> > It fixes a regression introduced in 4.4.34 which makes systems

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 14:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote > > It fixes a regression introduced in 4.4.34 which makes systems > > unbootable for us. We are currently running that patch on top of > > 4.4.35 and I can confirm that it fixes the issue. > > I wait for networking stable patches to come from the

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 14:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote > > It fixes a regression introduced in 4.4.34 which makes systems > > unbootable for us. We are currently running that patch on top of > > 4.4.35 and I can confirm that it fixes the issue. > > I wait for networking stable patches to come from the

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 02:46:19PM +0100, Andre Noll wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 10:27, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote > > > Responses should be made by Fri Dec 2 09:26:46 UTC 2016. > > If you haven't done so already, could you please add c9b8af13 > (flow_dissect: call init_default_flow_dissectors()

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 02:46:19PM +0100, Andre Noll wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 10:27, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote > > > Responses should be made by Fri Dec 2 09:26:46 UTC 2016. > > If you haven't done so already, could you please add c9b8af13 > (flow_dissect: call init_default_flow_dissectors()

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 10:27, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote > Responses should be made by Fri Dec 2 09:26:46 UTC 2016. If you haven't done so already, could you please add c9b8af13 (flow_dissect: call init_default_flow_dissectors() earlier) for 4.4.37? It fixes a regression introduced in 4.4.34 which

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

On Wed, Nov 30, 10:27, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote > Responses should be made by Fri Dec 2 09:26:46 UTC 2016. If you haven't done so already, could you please add c9b8af13 (flow_dissect: call init_default_flow_dissectors() earlier) for 4.4.37? It fixes a regression introduced in 4.4.34 which

[PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.36 release. There are 21 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let me know. Responses should be made by Fri Dec 2 09:26:46 UTC 2016. Anything

[PATCH 4.4 00/21] 4.4.36-stable review

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.36 release. There are 21 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let me know. Responses should be made by Fri Dec 2 09:26:46 UTC 2016. Anything