From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762967AbXKMTo0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:44:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761479AbXKMToE (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:44:04 -0500 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:56275 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760962AbXKMToB (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:44:01 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 11:38:52 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Dmitri Vorobiev Cc: tigran@aivazian.fsnet.co.uk, viro@ftp.linux.org.uk, Linux-kernel Subject: Re: [BUGS][PATCH] Fixes to the BFS filesystem driver Message-Id: <20071113113852.386219f6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <4739D1A0.20805@gmail.com> References: <4739D1A0.20805@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.1 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:32:32 +0300 Dmitri Vorobiev wrote: > Hi Tigran, > > I found a few bugs in the BFS driver. Detailed description of the bugs as well as the steps to reproduce the errors are given in the kernel bugzilla. Please follow these links for more information: > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9363 > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9364 > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9365 > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9366 > > The patch included in this email fixes the bugs described above. Besides, the patch introduces coding style changes to make the BFS driver conform to the requirements specified for Linux kernel code. Finally, I made a few cosmetic changes such as removal of trivial debug output. > > Also, the patch removes the fields `si_lf_ioff' and `si_lf_sblk' of the in-core superblock structure. These fields are initialized but never actually used. > > If you are wondering why I need BFS, here is the answer: I am using this driver in the context of Linux kernel classes I am teaching in the Moscow State University and in the International Institute of Information Technology in Pune, India. I was wondering ;) BFS users aren't common. Thanks for the fixes. For future reference: we prefer that an individual patch not do more than one thing. So it would have been preferable to present this work as a sequence of patches. Probably the high-priority patches (ie: bugfixes) should be the earlier patches in a case like this. Because then we can backport the fix into 2.6.23 and maybe 2.6.22 with some confidence. Also, separating out the cleanups for the bugfixes makes it easier for people to review and understand the bugfixes. Still, that's a minor detail compared to getting a filesystem bug fixed so I merged your change as-is, thanks