On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 09:06:24AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2018-12-03 23:22:46, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> > Den 2018-12-03 kl. 11:22, skrev Sasha Levin:
> >
> > >
> > > This is a case where theory collides with the real world. Yes, our QA is
> > > lacking, but we don't have the option
On Mon 2018-12-03 23:22:46, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> Den 2018-12-03 kl. 11:22, skrev Sasha Levin:
>
> >
> > This is a case where theory collides with the real world. Yes, our QA is
> > lacking, but we don't have the option of not doing the current process.
> > If we stop backporting until a
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:22:46PM +0159, Thomas Backlund wrote:
Den 2018-12-03 kl. 11:22, skrev Sasha Levin:
This is a case where theory collides with the real world. Yes, our QA is
lacking, but we don't have the option of not doing the current process.
If we stop backporting until a future
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:22:46PM +0159, Thomas Backlund wrote:
Den 2018-12-03 kl. 11:22, skrev Sasha Levin:
This is a case where theory collides with the real world. Yes, our QA is
lacking, but we don't have the option of not doing the current process.
If we stop backporting until a future
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:22:46PM +0159, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> Den 2018-12-03 kl. 11:22, skrev Sasha Levin:
>
> >
> > This is a case where theory collides with the real world. Yes, our QA is
> > lacking, but we don't have the option of not doing the current process.
> > If we stop
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:22:46PM +0159, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> Den 2018-12-03 kl. 11:22, skrev Sasha Levin:
>
> >
> > This is a case where theory collides with the real world. Yes, our QA is
> > lacking, but we don't have the option of not doing the current process.
> > If we stop
Den 2018-12-03 kl. 11:22, skrev Sasha Levin:
>
> This is a case where theory collides with the real world. Yes, our QA is
> lacking, but we don't have the option of not doing the current process.
> If we stop backporting until a future data where our QA problem is
> solved we'll end up with what
Den 2018-12-03 kl. 11:22, skrev Sasha Levin:
>
> This is a case where theory collides with the real world. Yes, our QA is
> lacking, but we don't have the option of not doing the current process.
> If we stop backporting until a future data where our QA problem is
> solved we'll end up with what
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 10:23:03AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 02:49:09AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
In 'git log'! You report these every time you fix something in upstream
xfs but don't backport it to stable trees:
That is so wrong on so many levels I don't really know
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 10:23:03AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 02:49:09AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
In 'git log'! You report these every time you fix something in upstream
xfs but don't backport it to stable trees:
That is so wrong on so many levels I don't really know
On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 1:23 AM Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 02:49:09AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 08:50:05AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > >On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:14:41AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > >>On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100,
On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 1:23 AM Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 02:49:09AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 08:50:05AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > >On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:14:41AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > >>On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100,
On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 02:49:09AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 08:50:05AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:14:41AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >>On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> >>>On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100,
On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 02:49:09AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 08:50:05AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:14:41AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >>On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> >>>On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100,
On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 08:45:48AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > Right now the XFS developers don't have the time or resources
> > > available to validate stable backports are correct and regression
> > > fre because we are focussed on ensuring the upstream fixes we've
> > > already made (and
On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 08:45:48AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > Right now the XFS developers don't have the time or resources
> > > available to validate stable backports are correct and regression
> > > fre because we are focussed on ensuring the upstream fixes we've
> > > already made (and
On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 08:50:05AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:14:41AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>I stopped my tests at 5 billion ops yesterday
On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 08:50:05AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:14:41AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>I stopped my tests at 5 billion ops yesterday
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:14:41AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> >On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >>I stopped my tests at 5 billion ops yesterday (i.e. 20 billion ops
> >>aggregate) to focus on testing the
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:14:41AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> >On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >>I stopped my tests at 5 billion ops yesterday (i.e. 20 billion ops
> >>aggregate) to focus on testing the
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 01:47:56PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:14:59PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Cherry picking only one of the
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 01:47:56PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:14:59PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Cherry picking only one of the
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:14:41AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > I stopped my tests at 5 billion ops yesterday (i.e. 20 billion ops
> > > aggregate) to focus on testing
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:14:41AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > I stopped my tests at 5 billion ops yesterday (i.e. 20 billion ops
> > > aggregate) to focus on testing
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
I stopped my tests at 5 billion ops yesterday (i.e. 20 billion ops
aggregate) to focus on testing the copy_file_range() changes, but
Darrick's tests are still ongoing and have
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:22:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
I stopped my tests at 5 billion ops yesterday (i.e. 20 billion ops
aggregate) to focus on testing the copy_file_range() changes, but
Darrick's tests are still ongoing and have
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 01:47:56PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:14:59PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > >
> > > Cherry picking only one of the 50-odd patches we've committed into
> > > late 4.19 and 4.20
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:40:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 01:47:56PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:14:59PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > >
> > > Cherry picking only one of the 50-odd patches we've committed into
> > > late 4.19 and 4.20
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 01:47:56PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:14:59PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >
> > Cherry picking only one of the 50-odd patches we've committed into
> > late 4.19 and 4.20 kernels to fix the problems we've found really
> > seems like asking for
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 01:47:56PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:14:59PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >
> > Cherry picking only one of the 50-odd patches we've committed into
> > late 4.19 and 4.20 kernels to fix the problems we've found really
> > seems like asking for
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:14:59PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> Cherry picking only one of the 50-odd patches we've committed into
> late 4.19 and 4.20 kernels to fix the problems we've found really
> seems like asking for trouble. If you're going to back port random
> data corruption fixes,
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:14:59PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> Cherry picking only one of the 50-odd patches we've committed into
> late 4.19 and 4.20 kernels to fix the problems we've found really
> seems like asking for trouble. If you're going to back port random
> data corruption fixes,
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 01:00:59AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner
>
> [ Upstream commit b450672fb66b4a991a5b55ee24209ac7ae7690ce ]
>
> If we are doing sub-block dio that extends EOF, we need to zero
> the unused tail of the block to initialise the data in it it. If we
> do not
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 01:00:59AM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner
>
> [ Upstream commit b450672fb66b4a991a5b55ee24209ac7ae7690ce ]
>
> If we are doing sub-block dio that extends EOF, we need to zero
> the unused tail of the block to initialise the data in it it. If we
> do not
From: Dave Chinner
[ Upstream commit b450672fb66b4a991a5b55ee24209ac7ae7690ce ]
If we are doing sub-block dio that extends EOF, we need to zero
the unused tail of the block to initialise the data in it it. If we
do not zero the tail of the block, then an immediate mmap read of
the EOF block
From: Dave Chinner
[ Upstream commit b450672fb66b4a991a5b55ee24209ac7ae7690ce ]
If we are doing sub-block dio that extends EOF, we need to zero
the unused tail of the block to initialise the data in it it. If we
do not zero the tail of the block, then an immediate mmap read of
the EOF block
36 matches
Mail list logo