On Sat, Mar 02, 2013 at 10:26:44AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 12:02:34PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >
> > I was mostly keying off what quota felt was best, I guess.
> > I'm not wedded to either approach, it was just a thought.
> > So you can take it or leave it. :)
>
> I'll take it, but for the record, there's a reason why I label patches
> with "I haven't tested this yet" disclaimers.
>
> For future reference, calling percpu_counter_init() and
> percpu_counter_destroy() is not optional --- without them, in your
> original patch, the kernel will crash them the first time an ext4 file
> system mount is attempted.
>
> No worries though, no harm done --- but it's better if people don't
> rely on me to catch bugs before they go into the tree. :-)
Really sorry for the delay reply.
Dave, thank you very much for your test and reporting this regression.
Ted, Eric, thank you very much for fixing it.
I really think I need to be responsible for reviewing and testing this
patch because I screw it up. My apology.
Thanks,
- Zheng
--
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
