On 12.05.23 14:19, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 11:21:27AM +0200, Marcus Hoffmann wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 18:57, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
Yeah, sorry, I didn't see it since it was in an attachment as opposed
to with an explicit [PATCH] subject line.
And at this point, the data=journal writeback patches have landed in
the ext4/dev tree, and while we could try to see if we could land this
before the next merge window, I'm worried about merge or semantic
conflicts of having both patches in a tree at one time.
I guess we could send it to Linus, let it get backported into stable,
and then revert it during the merge window, ahead of applying the
data=journal cleanup patch series. But that seems a bit ugly. Or we
could ask for an exception from the stable kernel folks, after I do a
full set of xfstests runs on it. (Of course, I don't think anyone has
been able to create a reliable reproducer, so all we can do is to test
for regression failures.)
Jan, Greg, what do you think?
We've noticed this appearing for us as well now (on 5.15 with
data=journaled) and I wanted to ask what the status here is. Did any fix
here make it into a stable kernel yet? If not, I suppose I can still
apply the patch posted above as a quick-fix until this (or another
solution) makes it into the stable tree?
Any reason you can't just move to 6.1.y instead? What prevents that?
We will move to 6.1.y soon-ish (we are downstream from the rpi kernel tree)
Is this problem fixed there though? I couldn't really find anything
related to that in the tree?
Best,
Marcus
________________________________
othermo GmbH | Sitz der Gesellschaft: Alzenau | Amtsgericht Aschaffenburg: HRB 14783 | USt-IdNr.: DE319977978 | Geschäftsführung: Dr. Dennis Metz.
