Re: unneeded btrfs changes -- Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/162] 6.1.57-rc1 review

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 11:51:42AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> On Mon 2023-10-09 14:59:41, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.57 release.
> > There are 162 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 Wed, 11 Oct 2023 13:00:55 +0000.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > 
> > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
> > 	https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v6.x/stable-review/patch-6.1.57-rc1.gz
> > or in the git tree and branch at:
> > 	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-6.1.y
> > and the diffstat can be found below.
> > 
> 
> > Sweet Tea Dorminy <sweettea-kernel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >     btrfs: use struct fscrypt_str instead of struct qstr
> > 
> > Sweet Tea Dorminy <sweettea-kernel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >     btrfs: setup qstr from dentrys using fscrypt helper
> > 
> > Sweet Tea Dorminy <sweettea-kernel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >     btrfs: use struct qstr instead of name and namelen pairs
> 
> These are rather intrusive, and marked with
> 
> Stable-dep-of: 9af86694fd5d ("btrfs: file_remove_privs needs an exclusive lock in direct io write")
> 
> but we don't have that one in 6.1, so we should not have these,
> either.

Ah, seems we forgot that dep patch, so that's now added which makes more
sense why the prep patches were added.

thanks,

greg k-h