On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 09:40:01AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 09:38:36AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 09:28:17AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 09:24:31AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > I think xfs/348 causes -rc4 to fall over if CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG=y due to > > > > the XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_RETURNs that shouldn't be there. > > > > > > Yes, that's the one. How are we going to fix that for -rc5? > > > > This patch fixes all the thinkos in the original patch, so I was just > > going to send it to Linus for rc5, but decided to poll the ML to see if > > anyone had an objection to that. > > That's what I thought and was surprised by the reply from Dave.. There's no mention that it fixes a bug, regression or anything else like that in the commit message. AFAICT from the description, it's just a cleanup to match how the rest of the checking code is structured with better error reporting. Perhaps the commit message needs more work, because I can't tell you what bug this is fixing from it.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
