From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: A BUG in snapshot merging
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:00:00 -0400
Message-ID: <20090922170000.GA1806@redhat.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0909211349480.16230@hs20-bc2-1.build.redhat.com>
	<20090921175655.GA28074@redhat.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0909211815580.31653@hs20-bc2-1.build.redhat.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0909221130590.24935@hs20-bc2-1.build.redhat.com>
Reply-To: device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0909221130590.24935@hs20-bc2-1.build.redhat.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel>,
	<mailto:dm-devel-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:dm-devel@redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:dm-devel-request@redhat.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel>,
	<mailto:dm-devel-request@redhat.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com
Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com
To: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Cc: dm-devel@redhat.com, Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com>
List-Id: dm-devel.ids

On Tue, Sep 22 2009 at 12:37pm -0400,
Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> wrote:

> I got this BUG when attempting to use merged patchset of Mike's and Jon's 
> patches (from 
> http://people.redhat.com/msnitzer/patches/snapshot-merge/kernel_unified/2.6.31/)
> 
> I think we shouldn't join these two patchsets together. I mean, before 
> clustered patches, merging was stable (I reviewed and tested it and except 
> for one userspace bug (already fixed) there were no flaws) ... now it 
> doesn't work.
> 
> I would recommend to leave merging as it was (i.e. stable, apply only 
> little patches on it) and develop Jon's clustering on the top of merging 
> and not interleave it with merging, so that the clustering patches could 
> be rolled back if problems were found. When clustering will be stable and 
> reviewed, it could be added to the kernel --- but it may happen later than 
> merging, so don't mix it.


When did you pull in the patches on my people page?

As of yesterday evening (Boston) I uploaded patches that are broken
(based on Jon's reworked handover).  I'm now combining your handover
with Jon's handover (in hopes of avoiding refactoring associations).

The patches are in flux... I'm working to resolve the issues that are
rooted at the handover mechanism.

As for patch ordering.  I'm not opposed to what you suggested (merge
first then clusterized).  But that is a secondary concern right now.  We
have enough time between now and the next merge window to get them both
working.

Mike