On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:47:45PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:09:55AM +0800, Zheng Liu wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 04:59:21PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 08:42:52PM +0800, Zheng Liu wrote: > > > > > If so, we might want to think about adding a sanity check to make sure > > > > > that by the time we are done with the inode in ext4_evict_inode() > > > > > (after we have forced writeback), the ext4_es_tree is empty. Agreed? > > > > > > > > Today I revise this patch again, and I find extent_status_tree is freed > > > > in ext4_clear_inode(). So maybe I don't think that we need to check > > > > this tree to be freed in ext4_evict_inode(). This change is in this > > > > patch '[RFC][PATCH 4/8 v2] ext4: let ext4 maintain extent status tree'. > > > > What's your opinion? > > > > > > When you say "revise this patch again", does that mean that you would > > > like to submit a new set of patch series with changes? Or just that > > > you are looking at this patch set again? > > > > Yes, I prepare to submit a new patch set. > > Well, note that the merge window is opening *soon*. I haven't yet > moved the master branch, so I can update the patch set, but I'm going > to need it soon. > > Can you let me know what changes you need to make? If it is to add > new features or new sanity checks, does it make sense to simply make > it as new commits to existing patch set? Or are there fundamental > problems with the current set, that would be better to fix in the > current set of commits? (Or is it just minor stylistic/spelling > fixes?) > > Thanks!! In new patch set, there is three changes as beblow: 1. add a sanity check in ext4_evict_inode() 2. fix a bug in ext4_find_delalloc_range(). This bug is reported by xfstest #230 when we enable bigalloc feature. 3. Add a new rwlock to protect extent status tree. So I think that we can only add a sanity check and fix the bigalloc bug, and then apply this patch set because the changes are minor. For adding a new lock to protect extent status tree, we can add this feature in a new patch. If you think it is OK, I can generate a new patch set, do some tests using xfstest, and submit it as soon as possible. What's your opinion? Regards, Zheng -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
