On 2/1/11 1:37 AM, Theodore Tso wrote: > > On Jan 31, 2011, at 11:21 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> On 1/31/11 6:15 PM, Curt Wohlgemuth wrote: >>> Sorry: I forgot to mention that I tested this on 2.6.37 under KVM >>> with the postgresql script specified by Ted in >>> 1449032be17abb69116dbc393f67ceb8bd034f92 -- without this commit, and >>> hence by default using the multiblock writepages submittal code. >>> >>> Without the patch, I'd hit the corruption problem about 50-70% of the >>> time. With the patch, I executed the script > 100 times with no >>> corruption seen. >> >> Can you resubmit with a changelog that indicates it's actually a corruption >> fix? Maybe even in the summary. That is important information to have >> for the commit... > > Agreed, although I'd also point out that the corruption fix was for code that > was disabled by default before 2.6.37 shipped, precisely because of the > reported corruption bug, and that this code should make it safe to use > the mblk_io_submit mount option, which will become the default in > 2.6.39. Right, but a corruption fix should never be committed w/o clear notice. Speaking as one who does a fair bit of git archaeology, it drives me nuts to have commits which look innocuous and are in fact momentous. > Normally I add such clarifications in the commit description (I'm used to > editing descriptions to correct English and to make things clearer, so for > me this is no big deal), but if you want resubmit with an updated description > and save me some work, I won't complain. :-) Ok, just trying to coach a bit ;) -Eric > -- Ted > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
