On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 10:59:35AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 05:09:51PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 03:07:20PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > I just rebased the for-next tree to correct a bad fixes tag in > > > the tree that was flags by a linux-next sanity check. The code is > > > the same, just a commit message needed rewriting, but that means all > > > the commit change and you'll need to do forced update if you pulled > > > the branch I pushed a few hours ago. > > > > > > -Dave. > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfs-linux.git for-next > > > > > > Head Commit: d4d12c02bf5f768f1b423c7ae2909c5afdfe0d5f > > > > > > xfs: collect errors from inodegc for unlinked inode recovery (2023-06-05 14:48:15 +1000) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Darrick J. Wong (1): > > > xfs: fix broken logic when detecting mergeable bmap records > > > > > > Dave Chinner (9): > > > xfs: buffer pins need to hold a buffer reference > > > xfs: restore allocation trylock iteration > > > xfs: defered work could create precommits > > > xfs: fix AGF vs inode cluster buffer deadlock > > > xfs: fix double xfs_perag_rele() in xfs_filestream_pick_ag() > > > xfs: fix agf/agfl verification on v4 filesystems > > > xfs: validity check agbnos on the AGFL > > > xfs: validate block number being freed before adding to xefi > > > xfs: collect errors from inodegc for unlinked inode recovery > > > > > > Geert Uytterhoeven (1): > > > xfs: Fix undefined behavior of shift into sign bit > > > > Hmm, I don't see "xfs: fix ag count overflow during growfs" in here. > > No, I didn't pick it up because it conflicted with other bug fix > stuff I am currently working on and I needed to look at it in more > detail before doing anything with it. I hadn't followed the > development of the patch at all, and it was up to v4 so I was going > to need to spend a little bit of time on it to see what the history > of it was first.... Ah, ok. Most of the history was the author and I going 'round and 'round about how to validate the incoming fsblocks to prevent agcount overflow without stomping on any other weird uses. > > Dave, do you want to do another 6.4 bug release, or throw things back > > over the wall so I can merge all the rest of the pending fixes for 6.5? > > If you want, you can pick it up once I've sent a pull request for > the current set of fixes in for-next. That will be later this week; > it needs to spend a couple of days in linux-next before that > happens, though. Yeah, sounds good to me. --D > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
