From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23E2BC4707C for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 05:06:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-3.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-3.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1rO9kX-00054v-0I; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 05:06:33 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1rO9kV-00054p-1m for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 05:06:31 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=Content-Type:Cc:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:From: In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding :Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=dXyIUVvSUCL/muzqemPrKFvk+YTfDh6SV30EeEyNy5E=; b=gYPVDjJ7K8rnBfoiywjRvSJtUS Hx9tHj6r5QHa0+ICYNUwkSCCR17M5QMfe88f1jHEA7/XluEwprVPH3D4SeDLYklOOgxQ0luPRm99f 3vKQmXfVn++PXQuAEOKEj1CrKSy8CFR5X28RI7tRbBqQK+VIjO2X+xQJ5NEDVwOVKWoY=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=Content-Type:Cc:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:From:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=dXyIUVvSUCL/muzqemPrKFvk+YTfDh6SV30EeEyNy5E=; b=Fv+n1pWWY/4UnUVk4nXFGIK7fu fUJ4dmg+A3hNRMnZPoigXddcUDgpiJ/9Bid1wKnnipgHCmxBnipP5EmXtn5RIIcG+42T0YfKbGw1m UUSm9M3sYoD0fVhH3poJWIet65tes1rUYRa3f52H0wQBuPGa1+29VJVDjmOP0L6kIbBA=; Received: from mail-ej1-f43.google.com ([209.85.218.43]) by sfi-mx-2.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.95) id 1rO9kP-0005xz-PF for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 05:06:31 +0000 Received: by mail-ej1-f43.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a26fa294e56so615062466b.0 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 21:06:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; t=1705035970; x=1705640770; darn=lists.sourceforge.net; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=dXyIUVvSUCL/muzqemPrKFvk+YTfDh6SV30EeEyNy5E=; b=K3H1HdHsasSQ5He1aR1hbYSB0UVu0hQ64cbCzgnXM87Y6PqntU1GJr53NgGKZpewra OWjPDwpUpIptMW7eHTt+ChlmvCZtO2/ZnmXKRTeSUxr/nD68tIB1rCEqAYJLXTSC/Ca9 90KEz0YoqE3yJu8NKVWLu0JrIHmjzZ8WIUuRQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1705035970; x=1705640770; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=dXyIUVvSUCL/muzqemPrKFvk+YTfDh6SV30EeEyNy5E=; b=NlPzGrqQf9kQYxnavhV3ud/3mzt067SCC5DYfcb+8Rzeus2adiV7PYvyQooYYqeDY9 vz1tngDlAIdfTWHTBpA8bHKNOBKpqzVbVAupYaK7/SdEQeuF5Duvctd8q5GEd2gTWtUI tXsjPjH7lAShj8Rppl+km3vx/nVLg56C9re+W36SvMOb/eqwXoLY09Agj8LKYWqrb1Qs 8gJFoUV7i3MUv9TiJRT3dwI6BsmYeGQtaTIFm8cFHz8nDjgFkBIGwR4aSg5s6BKTmuKA IRgLL4xN/qmdgrNyrgJEMVNKZt0bWnG88ebINBxAKPLbGO4IyA2GbfpAmd7KXAvvI9bg PfkQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwKUkhVYWa9CGWlnPK7VDq9YXM8e4BvcRm93lMVGvTg6TWVVvJa MwA7/w6aaPJenDiHSB+pC89mkcVIJEs5T2JaQwJm3IesVFpScbLq X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEOd8WWyoV+qMxOmFzBtzjEk8x846GURl4wEdQzUuG2jgg3zIG0aurPjgQf0G+UP0HYXLfHDw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:890:b0:a28:a13e:2339 with SMTP id zt16-20020a170907089000b00a28a13e2339mr274491ejb.61.1705035969672; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 21:06:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ej1-f46.google.com (mail-ej1-f46.google.com. [209.85.218.46]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v7-20020a1709063bc700b00a29bd8f9edbsm1358021ejf.72.2024.01.11.21.06.08 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Jan 2024 21:06:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-f46.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a26fa294e56so615061466b.0 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 21:06:08 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:f345:b0:a27:c453:8706 with SMTP id hg5-20020a170906f34500b00a27c4538706mr303288ejb.125.1705035968579; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 21:06:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 21:05:51 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Jaegeuk Kim , Al Viro X-Headers-End: 1rO9kP-0005xz-PF Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [GIT PULL] f2fs update for 6.8-rc1 X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux F2FS Dev Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 at 10:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jaegeuk/f2fs.git tags/f2fs-for-6.8-rc1 Hmm. I got a somewhat confusing conflict in f2fs_rename(). And honestly, I really don't know what the right resolution is. What I ended up with was this: if (old_is_dir) { if (old_dir_entry) f2fs_set_link(old_inode, old_dir_entry, old_dir_page, new_dir); else f2fs_put_page(old_dir_page, 0); f2fs_i_links_write(old_dir, false); } which seems to me to be the right thing as a resolution. But I note that linux-next has something different, and it is because Al said in https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231220013402.GW1674809@ZenIV/ that the resolution should just be if (old_dir_entry) f2fs_set_link(old_inode, old_dir_entry, old_dir_page, new_dir); if (old_is_dir) f2fs_i_links_write(old_dir, false); instead. Now, some of those differences are artificial - old_dir_entry can only be set if old_is_dir is set, so the nesting difference is kind of a red herring. But I feel like that f2fs_put_page() is actually needed, or you end up with a reference leak. So despite the fact that Al is never wrong, I ended up going with my gut, and kept my resolution that is different from linux-next. End result: I'm now very leery of my merge. On the one hand, I think it's right. On the other hand, the likelihood that Al is wrong is pretty low. So please double- and triple-check that merge, and please send in a fix for it. Presumably with a comment along the lines of "Al was right, don't try to overthink things". Hubris. That's the word for thinking you know better than Al. Linus _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel