Re: [PATCH 5.10 v2 6/7] xfs: reorder iunlink remove operation in xfs_ifree

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

 



On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 4:07 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 03:37:59PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 1:26 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 01:16:33PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 12:41 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > > > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 12:30:13PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 12:04 PM Frank Hofmann <fhofmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 6:49 AM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > commit 9a5280b312e2e7898b6397b2ca3cfd03f67d7be1 upstream.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [backport for 5.10.y]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Amir, hi Dave,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I've got no objections to backporting this change at all. We've been
> > > > > > > using the patch on our internal 5.15 tracker branch happily for
> > > > > > > several months now.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Would like to highlight though that it's currently not yet merged in
> > > > > > > linux-stable 5.15 branch either (it's in 5.19 and mainline alright).
> > > > > > > If this gets queued for 5.10 then maybe it also should be for 5.15 ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Frank,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Quoting from my cover letter:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Patches 6-7 in this 5.10.y update have not been applied to 5.15.y yet.
> > > > > > I pointed Leah's attention to these patches and she said she will
> > > > > > include them in a following 5.15.y update.
> > > > >
> > > > > And as you know, this means I can't take this series at all until that
> > > > > series is ready, so to help us out, in the future, just don't even send
> > > > > them until they are all ready together.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > What?
> > > >
> > > > You cannot take backports to 5.10.y before they are applied to 5.15.y?
> > > > Since when?
> > >
> > > Since always.
> > >
> > > Why would you ever want someone to upgrade from an older tree (like
> > > 5.10.y) to a newer one (5.15.y) and have a regression?
> > >
> >
> > That is certainly not a goal when backporting fixes to 5.10.y, but it
> > can happen as a by-product of the decentralized nature of testing
> > backports.
> >
> > But it did not bother you when xfs patches were applied to 5.4.y and
> > no xfs patches at all applied to 5.10.y for two years?
>
> I've been bothered by xfs patches for so long that really, I didn't care
> as the maintainers didn't seem bothered either :)
>
> But now that everything is working properly, let's do it correctly
> please.
>
> > > So we always try to make sure patches are always applied to newer trees
> > > first.  Yes, sometimes we miss this and make mistakes, but it's always
> > > been this way and we fix that whenever it happens accidentally.
> > >
> >
> > That is my intention.
> > I will try to keep to that rule in the future.
> > I would have waited for the patches to land in 5.15.y, but
> > Leah got distracted by another task so I decided to not wait,
> > knowing that the patches are already in her queue.
> >
> > > I'll drop this series from my review queue for now until the 5.15.y
> > > series shows up.
> >
> > Please don't drop the series.
> > Please drop patches 6-7 if you must
> > Or if you insist I can re-post patches 1-5.
>
> Please resend as just the correct ones that you want so I know what to
> pick exactly.
>

Posted v3 with patches 1-5.

Thanks,
Amir.



[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