On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 6:59 PM Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 12:20:59PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 3:11 AM Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > This series performs some refactoring of our timestamp and inode > > > encoding functions, then retrofits the timestamp union to handle > > > timestamps as a 64-bit nanosecond counter. Next, it refactors the quota > > > grace period expiration timer code a bit before implementing bit > > > shifting to widen the effective counter size to 34 bits. This enables > > > correct time handling on XFS through the year 2486. > > > > > > > I intend to start review of this series. > > I intend to focus on correctness of conversions and on backward > > forward compatibility. > > > > I saw Eric's comments on quota patches and that you mentioned > > you addressed some of them. I do not intend to review correctness > > of existing quota code anyway ;-) > > > > I see that you updated the branch 3 days ago and that patch 2/14 > > was dropped. I assume the rest of the series is mostly unchanged, > > but I can verify that before reviewing each patch. > > > > As far as you are concerned, should I wait for v2 or can I continue > > to review this series? > > I plan to rebase the whole series after 5.8-rc1, but if you'd like to > look at the higher level details (particularly in the quota code, which > is a bit murky) sooner than later, I don't mind emailing out what I have > now. > No need. I can look at high level details on your branch. Will hold off review comments until rebase unless I find something that calls for your attention. Thanks, Amir.
