Re: Linux 5.10

[Mike Snitzer]

On Mon, Dec 14 2020 at 12:52am -0500,
Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 12:31:47AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 03:03:29PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >  > Ok, here it is - 5.10 is tagged and pushed out.
> >  > 
> >  > I pretty much always wish that the last week was even calmer than it
> >  > was, and that's true here too. There's a fair amount of fixes in here,
> >  > including a few last-minute reverts for things that didn't get fixed,
> >  > but nothing makes me go "we need another week".
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> >  > Mike Snitzer (1):
> >  >       md: change mddev 'chunk_sectors' from int to unsigned
> > 
> > Seems to be broken.  This breaks mounting my raid6 partition:
> > 
> > [   87.290698] attempt to access beyond end of device
> >                md0: rw=4096, want=13996467328, limit=6261202944
> > [   87.293371] attempt to access beyond end of device
> >                md0: rw=4096, want=13998564480, limit=6261202944
> > [   87.296045] BTRFS warning (device md0): couldn't read tree root
> > [   87.300056] BTRFS error (device md0): open_ctree failed
> > 
> > Reverting it goes back to the -rc7 behaviour where it mounts fine.
> 
> If the developer/maintainer(s) agree, I can revert this and push out a
> 5.10.1, just let me know.

Yes, these should be reverted from 5.10 via 5.10.1:

e0910c8e4f87 dm raid: fix discard limits for raid1 and raid10
f075cfb1dc59 md: change mddev 'chunk_sectors' from int to unsigned

They were also both marked for stable@, and I just got email stating
that you've staged them both for 5.4 and 5.9, but they shouldn't go to
stable@.  We need to reassess and fix during 5.11.

I'll now respond with my Nacked-by to each patch email relative to these
commits.

Thanks,
Mike