Re: downgrade from kernel 3.17 to 3.10

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Thank you for your answer.

I will reformat the disk with a 3.10 kernel in the meantime, because I
don't have any rpms for 3.16 now.


On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Cristian Falcas posted on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:13:48 +0300 as excerpted:
>
>> Can I downgrade the kernel from 3.17.1 to latest 3.10 if I have a btrfs
>> partition formatted and used on 3.17.1?
>>
>> I mean, is there something that could go wrong with the fs if suddenly I
>> use an older kernel?
>>
>> I want to downgrade because last night we had some 1200 oops's in 1 hour
>> on the 3.17 kernel related to "CPU#n stuck" and what seems to be btrfs
>> work:
>
> You definitely don't want to downgrade that far -- there's way too many
> btrfs fixes since then and you'd be needlessly risking your data.
>
> Much more viable would be to downgrade to the latest 3.16.x stable kernel
> (definitely not 3.16.0 or 3.16.1 as they had an open issue much like
> 3.17.0 does), and then upgrade to the latest 3.17.x in a couple weeks, as
> there's some critical stable fixes in the pipeline for it.
>
> Or if you must, 3.14.x is the latest long-term-stable series, and is
> continuing to get btrfs-stable patches along with the other stable
> patches it gets.
>
> But I'd definitely not recommend reverting to older than 3.14.x stable
> series, because even if it's a stable series and they catch and apply to
> stable all the patches that ideally need to be applied back that far, if
> you have problems, what you'd be running is simply too far back in
> history to get much support on this list for.
>
> Also, keep in mind that the btrfs-is-experimental warnings didn't come
> off until 3.12 or so.  Any btrfs older than that was officially
> experimental when it came out, and even if it's a long-term-stable
> kernel, no stable series patches are going to remove the still
> experimental nature of btrfs in a kernel that old.
>
> So 3.10, no way if it were /my/ data!  Latest 3.14.x stable, I'd
> consider.  But preferably step back to the latest 3.16.x (past 3.16.2 for
> sure) temporarily, and try latest 3.17.x again in a couple weeks (or 3.18-
> live-git now) as there's some critical fixes for 3.17-stable now in 3.18
> and still making their way to the stable releases.
>
> --
> Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
> "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
> and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux