On 09/05/2014 11:45 PM, Greg KH wrote:

On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 09:31:06AM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:

quoted

On 08/10/2014 09:54 AM, Peter Kieser wrote:

quoted

On 2014-08-05 9:58 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:

quoted

On 08/04/2014 10:33 PM, Kent Overstreet wrote:

quoted

Hey Jens, here's the pull request for 3.17 - typically late, but lots of tasty
fixes in this one :)

Normally I'd say no, but since it's basically just fixes, I guess we can
pull it in. But generally, it has to be in my hands a week before this,
so it can simmer a bit in for-next before going in...

Are these fixes going to be backported to 3.10 or other stable releases?

Could you please answer this question ?

If you don't want to maintain bcache for stable kernels (I can
understand that), can you mark it at least as unstable/experimental
stuff since it really is ?

WTF?

Just because a maintainer/developer doesn't want to do anything for the
stable kernel releases does _NOT_ mean the code is
"unstable/expreimental" at all.

That's not how stable kernel releases work.  _IF_ a maintainer wants to
/ has the time to, they can mark patches for inclusion in stable kernel
releases.  Given the huge list of patches that Jens just posted, I doubt
that those are really something I would ever take for a stable kernel
release.

Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt for more details
please.  And don't ask others to do backporting work for you, it's not
ok, and is something that I have always said is never required, and is
not going to be.

wow, not sure why I deserve such anger...

Looks like you haven't understood me well and specially I *never* asked
others to do the backporting for me.

Please reread the thread, perhaps peaceful music can help too.