On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 23:57:59 -0500, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 10:58:32PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > The third patch is a fix which shouldn't cause any issues. So you can > > take just that one and leave the other two aside until we are able to > > resolve the issue. > > I thought the third patch depending on the first two? Certainly it > doesn't apply cleanly without the first two patches... My patch fix old issue, but i've prepared it on top of Jan's patches only for simplicity. I'll send new version which not depend on his patches today. Over-all Jan's statment that split should not happen inside end_io and it is clear sing of a bug is absolutely right decision. This helps us to spot several hidden issues (number is still unknown) so may be it is reasonable to split first patch in two parts: 1) disable uninitialized extents merging itself. 2) Print warning if split is required inside end_io(so only warning will be printed, but w/o data corruption) 3) Get rid of extent split machinery from end_io (because it is not longer valid situation) (1) and (2) should be accepted ASAP and will help us to spot and fix other hidden issues. And we fix all related issues it will be safe to apply (3)'rd one. I'll send patches soon. > > - 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 -- 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
