On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 08:41:58AM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 5:11 AM, Dave Chinner > <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Test case for superblock shrinkers running while the filesystem > > is being set up and/or torn down and tripping over inconsistent > > state. > > > > Signed-Off-By: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> --- ... > > Isn't it dangerous for the time being? Your fix commit message > says you got reports of OOPS. If you have a kernel with the mount_delay sysfs option, you will have a kernel with the fix. If you don't have mount_delay, the test won't run. > Not sure what should be the authoritative condition to remove dangerous > point kernel release with a fix?? I'm not going to add "dangerous" to new regression tests that have a fix pending anymore because nobody is doing maintenance tasks like sweeping out tests that aren't dangerous to upstream. Tagging new regression tests as dangerous just creates unnecessary technical debt. 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
