On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:41:15AM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: > Hey, > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 08:42:20AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:37:51PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > Sure, if you want to. But doing that shouldn't prevent this fix from > > > being committed in the mean time, especially as other filesystems > > > already use this method for avoiding these problems. > > > > I'd much prefer aiming for the proper fix first. If for some reason we > > can't get it done in time the workaround can be applied. > > Dave probably has a customer waiting on this. Obviously. And being a kernel where we have a fixed ABI, we can't backport any fix that changes core code. > If pulling this in will make a > proper fix more difficult to do I can understand keeping the patch out. It doesn't make a proper fix any harder - removing 2 lines of code is trivial. > Otherwise, can't we just remove this along with the other filesystems' > equivalent code when the proper fix is committed? Yes, we can. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
