On 2013.07.23 at 10:07 -0500, Ben Myers wrote: > Hi Markus, > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:42:59PM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > On 2013.07.22 at 14:48 -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote: > > > On 07/22/13 10:15, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > > > On 2013.07.22 at 09:40 -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote: > > > >> On 07/22/13 06:07, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > > >>> On 2013.07.22 at 20:18 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > >> It seems to me that since we cannot fix this for inode 1/2, then besides > > > >> this patch we have to revert patch cca9f93a52d and make it inode 3+ / > > > >> superblock 5+ (crc) dependent. > > > > > > > > Which is exactly what the hunk I've posted does. > > > > > > > > Here's the combined patch: > > > > > > Following Dave's instruction to recreate this problem, your patch works > > > with an inode 2 and inode 3 (once I remembered to load the module before > > > recovery). Dave's patch was successful on inode 3 - again after I > > > remembered to load the module before recovery. > > > > > > Whomever makes the formal patch, consider it reviewed-by me. > > > > To get this patch to Linus ASAP, here's the combined patch again. > > Please apply. > > Thanks. > > I'd prefer to have Dave take another look at the combined patch before pulling > this in. Even so, we shouldn't have any trouble getting this into -rc3. Ok, understood. I'll let Dave handle the rest. BTW the comment above xfs_iread() probably needs an update, too. -- Markus _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
