On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 05:43:14PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 12:30:28PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > It doesn't include all of them. At the moment there are 83 of them(!) which I > > haven't figured out how to release in a reviewable manner. Roughly speaking, > > the patches can be grouped: > > > > 1. The unapplied patches from the October submission (fuse2fs, 64bit > > conversion, xattr editing part 1, metadata checksumming tests) > > 2. The xattr-editing patches > > 3. Fixes for uninit extent handling > > 4. Patches to test and turn on block_validity > > 5. A bunch of coverity fixes > > 6. Fixes for bugs I found by running xfstests atop fuse2fs > > 7. Fixes for that thing about block_uninit groups that Akira Fujita and I were > > discussing > > 8. Fixes for 1k block filesystems with meta_bg > > 9. Patches to prevent too-high lblk mapping > > > > I could collapse all the post-October fuse2fs and xattr-editing patches into > > the original submissions, but that seems like it would be harder for people to > > review the new changes. > > Can you send at least some of the fixes independent of patches that > have API/ABI or functionality impacts, or are dependent on patches > that will require more careful review? > > In particular, if there are any fixes that might lead to data loss or > be significant in some way (potential security issues, etc.) sending > them independently, preferably against the maint branch, would be a > good idea, so we can get that into a 1.42.x maintenance release. Shouldn't be too hard, all I have to do is shove the fuse2fs/xattr/64bit-conv patches towards the end. :) --D > > Thanks, > > - 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
