Re: [PATCH 5.15 CANDIDATE v2 0/8] xfs stable candidate patches for 5.15.y (part 1)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 09:23:07AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 11:27:41AM -0700, Leah Rumancik wrote:
> > The patch testing has been increased to 100 runs per test on each 
> > config. A baseline without the patches was established with 100 runs 
> > to help detect hard failures / tests with a high fail rate. Any 
> > failures seen in the backports branch but not in the baseline branch 
> > were then run 1000+ times on both the baseline and backport branches 
> > and the failure rates compared. The failures seen on the 5.15 
> > baseline are listed at 
> > https://gist.github.com/lrumancik/5a9d85d2637f878220224578e173fc23. 
> > No regressions were seen with these patches.
> > 
> > To make the review process easier, I have been coordinating with Amir 
> > who has been testing this same set of patches on 5.10. He will be 
> > sending out the corresponding 5.10 series shortly.
> > 
> > Change log from v1 
> > (https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220603184701.3117780-1-leah.rumancik@xxxxxxxxx/):
> > - Increased testing
> > - Reduced patch set to overlap with 5.10 patches
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Leah
> > 
> > Brian Foster (1):
> >   xfs: punch out data fork delalloc blocks on COW writeback failure
> > 
> > Darrick J. Wong (4):
> >   xfs: remove all COW fork extents when remounting readonly
> >   xfs: prevent UAF in xfs_log_item_in_current_chkpt
> >   xfs: only bother with sync_filesystem during readonly remount
> 
> 5.15 already has the vfs fixes to make sync_fs/sync_filesystem actually
> return error codes, right?
> 
> >   xfs: use setattr_copy to set vfs inode attributes
> > 
> > Dave Chinner (1):
> >   xfs: check sb_meta_uuid for dabuf buffer recovery
> > 
> > Rustam Kovhaev (1):
> >   xfs: use kmem_cache_free() for kmem_cache objects
> > 
> > Yang Xu (1):
> >   xfs: Fix the free logic of state in xfs_attr_node_hasname
> 
> This one trips me up every time I look at it, but this looks correct.
> 
> If the answer to the above question is yes, then:
> Acked-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>

I should've mentioned that this is acked-by for patches 1-7, since Amir
posted a question about patch 8 that seems not to have been answered(?)

(Do all the new setgid inheritance tests actually pass with patch 8
applied?  The VFS fixes were thorny enough that I'm not as confident
that they've all been applied to 5.15.y...)

--D

> --D
> 
> > 
> >  fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr.c      | 17 +++++------
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c             | 15 ++++++++--
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item_recover.c |  2 +-
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_extfree_item.c     |  6 ++--
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c             | 56 ++---------------------------------
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_log_cil.c          |  6 ++--
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_pnfs.c             |  3 +-
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_super.c            | 21 +++++++++----
> >  8 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 79 deletions(-)
> > 
> > -- 
> > 2.36.1.476.g0c4daa206d-goog
> > 



[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux