On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:49:59AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Thu, 19 May 2011, Greg KH wrote: > > 2.6.33-longterm review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us > > know. > > We've got in a muddle on this one: too many tmpfs races and too many trees!
Yeah, it's messy :( > So far, so good: indeed let's have the spurious ENOSPC fix in > 33-longterm. > > But here this 15/24 patch veers off into a quite different patch, > for "tmpfs: fix race between umount and writepage" (46/71 in the > 38-stable series). I've appended the actual ENOSPC backport at the end. > > Yes, let's have this writepage fix in 33-longterm too (the 38-stable > patch should apply), but it does need "tmpfs: fix race between swapoff > and writepage" (47/71 in the 38-stable series) on top to correct it, > please add that in too. > > For differing reasons, none of these races is as likely in 2.6.33 > as in 2.6.38, but good to include the fixes anyway; whereas 2.6.32 > gets more complicated for some of them, so I haven't bothered there. > > (I think I'm reading the mails right, but of course made a fool of > myself in the past, because of how gmail "rationalized" my view of > them: I hope this won't be another such case.) Ok, as this really isn't a big deal for .33, how about I just drop all of the tmpfs patches for .33-longterm and we call it a day :) It's easier that way for me by far. If you think these really should all go to .33, can you send me the individual patches so I know exactly what ones, and in what order, to apply? thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ stable mailing list [email protected] http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/stable
