On 8/22/20 9:48 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 8/22/20 8:33 AM, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 03:26:35PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>>> Resending this one, as I've been carrying it privately since May. The >>>>>> necessary bits are now upstream (and XFS/btrfs equiv changes as well), >>>>>> please consider this one for 5.9. Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> The necessary commit only hit upstream as of 5.9-rc1, unless I'm >>>>> missing something? It's on my queue to send to Linus once I get my >>>>> (late) ext4 primary pull request for 5.9. >>>> >>>> Right, it went in at the start of the merge window for 5.9. Thanks Ted! >>> >>> Didn't see it in the queue that just sent in, is it still queued up? >> >> It wasn't in the queue which I queued up because that was based on >> 5.8-rc4. Linus was a bit grumpy (fairly so) because it was late, and >> that's totally on me. >> >> He has said that he's going to start ignoring pull requests that >> aren't fixes only if this becomes a pattern, so while I can send him >> another pull request which will just have that one change, there are >> no guarantees he's going to take it at this late date. >> >> Sorry, when you sent me the commit saying that the changes that were >> needed were already upstream on August 3rd, I thought that meant that >> they were aready in Linus's tree. I should have checked and noticed >> that that in fact "ext4: flag as supporting buffered async reads" >> wasn't compiling against Linus's upstream tree, so I didn't realize >> this needed to be handled as a special case during the merge window. > > Well to be honest, this kind of sucks. I've been posting it since May, > and the ideal approach would have been to just ack it and I could have > carried it in my tree. That's what we did for btrfs and XFS, both of > which have it. > > The required patches *were* upstreamed on August 3rd, which is why I > mentioned that. But yes, not in 5.8 or earlier, of course. > > So I suggest that you either include it for the next pull request for > Linus, or that I put it in with your ack. Either is fine with me. I'd > consider this a "dropping the ball" kind of thing, it's not like the > patch hasn't been in linux-next or hasn't been ready for months. This > isn't some "oh I wrote this feature after the merge window" event. It'd > be a real shame to ship 5.9 and ext4 not have support for the more > efficient async buffered reads, imho, especially since the two other > major local file systems already have it. > > Let me know what you think. Ted, can you make a call on this, please? It's now post -rc2. Let's get this settled and included, one way or another. -- Jens Axboe
