On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 06:01:15PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 05:05:43 PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > Hi folks, > > > > Now that the 5.19 kernel code is largely stablised for the first > > merge, I've been starting to get together the libxfs sync tree for > > xfsprogs with all those changes in it. I have built a branch > > that can be found here: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dgc/xfsprogs-dev.git libxfs-5.19-sync > > > > that contains my work in progress so far. It's build on top of the > > current xfsprogs for-next branch. I've ported across everything up > > to the start of the LARP series so far, so I have done the porting > > of the large extent count work and all the other bits and pieces for > > log changes and so on. > > > > For the large extent count work, I have not added any of the > > specific new xfsprogs functionality like mkfs, etc. Patches 14-18 > > of Chandan's V7 patch series here: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20220321052027.407099-1-chandan.babu@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > still need to be ported on top of this for the functionality to be > > fully supported in xfsprogs. > > > > Chandan, can you port those changes over to this libxfs sync branch > > and check that I haven't missed anything in the conversion? I did > > pick up one of your patches from that series - "Introduce per-inode > > 64-bit extent counters" - because of all the xfs_db bits in it for > > the change in on-disk format, but otherwise I've largely just worked > > through fixing all the compiler errors and converting the xfsprogs > > code over to the new functions and types. > > > > If you port the ramin patches over to thsi branch and test them, > > I'll include them into the branch. I'll be checking for stability > > and regressions on this brnach for the next couple of days, and if > > everythign looks OK I'll send Eric a pull request for it.... > > Apart from a single nit, The "large extent counter" patches already included > in libxfs sync branch look good. > > My original patch "xfs: Introduce xfs_dfork_nextents() helper" had an > invocation of "xfs_dfork_data_extents(dip);" in process_dev_inode() instead of > "xfs_dfork_nextents(dip, XFS_DATA_FORK);". Ok, thatnks for finding that - I'll update the branch I have with that fix, it shouldn't affect anything else you do on top of it... > I will try to port the remaining patches by today and will run xfstests > overnight. I will post the patches tomorrow if the test execution doesn't > reveal any bugs. Thanks! -Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
