On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26 2018 at 2:52pm -0400, > Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Ross Zwisler >> <ross.zwisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > QUEUE_FLAG_DAX is an indication that a given block device supports >> > filesystem DAX and should not be set for PMEM namespaces which are in "raw" >> > or "sector" modes. These namespaces lack struct page and are prevented >> > from participating in filesystem DAX. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Suggested-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> Why is this cc: stable? What is the user visible impact of this change >> especially given the requirement to validate QUEUE_FLAG_DAX with >> bdev_dax_supported()? Patch looks good, but it's just a cosmetic fixup >> afaics. > > This isn't cosmetic when you consider that stacking up a DM device is > looking at this flag to determine whether a table does or does _not_ > support DAX. > > So this patch, in conjunction with the other changes in the series, is > certainly something I'd consider appropriate for stable. I think this classifies as something that never worked correctly and is not a regression. It does not identify which commit it is repairing or the user visible failure mode. -- 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
