On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 09:26:42AM -0600, Mark Tinguely wrote: > On 12/11/12 17:56, Dave Chinner wrote: > >On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 05:42:43PM -0600, Mark Tinguely wrote: > >>From: Mark Tinguely<tinguely@xxxxxxx> > >> > >>Upstream commit: a00416844b8f4b0106344bdfd90fe45a854b1d05 > >> > >> xfs: zero allocation_args on the kernel stack > >> > >> Zero the kernel stack space that makes up the xfs_alloc_arg structures. > > > >Without the stack switching patches in the tree, this doesn't fix > >any real problem. > > > >Cheers, > > > >Dave. > > There are other users of the xfs_alloc_arg.userdata other than the > former version of the allocation worker. Sure, but it only has a minor effect on behaviour if it is wrong - I think the only thing it will cause is an extra log force if we try to allocate a busy extent or invalidation of a the buffer before it gets reusued. Neither are issues that cause user-visible problems, and the behaviour has been like this for many, many years without anyone seeing adverse behaviour. As such, it's not a problem that needs to be fixed in a stable kernel. Now, if you were backporting the stack overflow fixes, that would be a different matter.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
