From: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@taobao.com>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ext4:dev 47/50] fs/ext4/indirect.c:1799 ext4_ind_punch_hole() warn: inconsistent returns mutex:
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 14:23:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120928142320.GA9473@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120928132055.GC13352@thunk.org>
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 09:20:55AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 02:07:19PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > Hi Zheng,
> >
> > FYI, there are new smatch warnings show up in
> >
> > tree: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4.git dev
> > head: b2f1a8e5612e2488a3995ec06b422b44651d088b
> > commit: 3e1b02687146ddefa8e53c2a5e13d3bd87b16b09 [47/50] ext4: add support for hole punching non-extent-mapped files
>
> I'm going to be dropping the indirect punch hole patches from the ext4
> dev tree, based on the number of xfstests failures that I found in my
> overnight testing.
>
> I had hoped the changes were small and localized, and wouldn't cause
> problems if the punch hole feature wasn't used, but at this point,
> given that many distributions are starting to use the ext4 file system
> for legacy ext3 file systems, my judgement is that the risks are too
> great for the upcoming merge window; so this will probably need to
> wait for the next development cycle.
Hi Ted,
These patches would need to do more tests, and I will look at them in
next development cycle. I am not sure whether indirect punch hole is
really useful for us or not. What do you think about this feature?
Thanks
Regards,
Zheng
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@taobao.com>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ext4:dev 47/50] fs/ext4/indirect.c:1799 ext4_ind_punch_hole() warn: inconsistent returns mutex:&inode->i_mutex: locked (1710) unlocked (1799)
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 22:23:20 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120928142320.GA9473@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120928132055.GC13352@thunk.org>
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 09:20:55AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 02:07:19PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > Hi Zheng,
> >
> > FYI, there are new smatch warnings show up in
> >
> > tree: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4.git dev
> > head: b2f1a8e5612e2488a3995ec06b422b44651d088b
> > commit: 3e1b02687146ddefa8e53c2a5e13d3bd87b16b09 [47/50] ext4: add support for hole punching non-extent-mapped files
>
> I'm going to be dropping the indirect punch hole patches from the ext4
> dev tree, based on the number of xfstests failures that I found in my
> overnight testing.
>
> I had hoped the changes were small and localized, and wouldn't cause
> problems if the punch hole feature wasn't used, but at this point,
> given that many distributions are starting to use the ext4 file system
> for legacy ext3 file systems, my judgement is that the risks are too
> great for the upcoming merge window; so this will probably need to
> wait for the next development cycle.
Hi Ted,
These patches would need to do more tests, and I will look at them in
next development cycle. I am not sure whether indirect punch hole is
really useful for us or not. What do you think about this feature?
Thanks
Regards,
Zheng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-28 14:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-28 6:07 [ext4:dev 47/50] fs/ext4/indirect.c:1799 ext4_ind_punch_hole() warn: inconsistent returns mutex:&ino Fengguang Wu
2012-09-28 6:07 ` [ext4:dev 47/50] fs/ext4/indirect.c:1799 ext4_ind_punch_hole() warn: inconsistent returns mutex:&inode->i_mutex: locked (1710) unlocked (1799) Fengguang Wu
2012-09-28 7:37 ` [ext4:dev 47/50] fs/ext4/indirect.c:1799 ext4_ind_punch_hole() warn: inconsistent returns mutex: Zheng Liu
2012-09-28 7:37 ` [ext4:dev 47/50] fs/ext4/indirect.c:1799 ext4_ind_punch_hole() warn: inconsistent returns mutex:&inode->i_mutex: locked (1710) unlocked (1799) Zheng Liu
2012-09-28 13:20 ` [ext4:dev 47/50] fs/ext4/indirect.c:1799 ext4_ind_punch_hole() warn: inconsistent returns mutex: Theodore Ts'o
2012-09-28 13:20 ` [ext4:dev 47/50] fs/ext4/indirect.c:1799 ext4_ind_punch_hole() warn: inconsistent returns mutex:&inode->i_mutex: locked (1710) unlocked (1799) Theodore Ts'o
2012-09-28 14:23 ` Zheng Liu [this message]
2012-09-28 14:23 ` Zheng Liu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120928142320.GA9473@gmail.com \
--to=gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=wenqing.lz@taobao.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.