From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: NeilBrown Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:50:38 +1000 Subject: [lustre-devel] [PATCH 09/24] lustre: don't use spare bits in iattr.ia_valid In-Reply-To: References: <152904663333.10587.10934053155404014785.stgit@noble> <152904669036.10587.17899565981649604892.stgit@noble> <87fu1gdb4w.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> <871sczd0fi.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> Message-ID: <87r2kvagmp.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org On Sun, Jun 24 2018, James Simmons wrote: > > Okay I did some more testing and found I get this error with or without > this patch. Its due to a regression from an earlier patch. Can't figure > out where its coming from. I looked at the d_lock usage and it seems > balanced. So all but the first patch for the lustre_compact* header > changes seem okay. BTW they need a rebasing. Also since I have separated > out your libcfs tracefile fixes which I will push your okay with it so > it might be best to break the patches into two series. I've changed the problematic lustre_compat patch after a closer look at the code. I'll post the result shortly. I don't understand your comment about "break the patches into two series". The goal for these patches isn't to make series', it is to apply them to the "lustre" branch, when they are ready. Some are ready (thanks for the confirmation), some aren't. The ones that aren't will get revised and reposted. I'm okay with you posting any patches that are useful, whether or not they conflict with anything in my lustre-testing branch. My tendency will be to apply your patches first, then rebase my outstanding lustre-testing patches on top of them. Thanks, NeilBrown -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 832 bytes Desc: not available URL: