From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 880E55234; Tue, 22 Apr 2025 01:19:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745284750; cv=none; b=rDB4L0r8MRSNTcUYTOy3fPZ004NOcd1KCuxbiS5BJTjXy4xZrDafkBcMQyMYVQAd3ca1moBo4q3S/8Sb8liobvU3VuHcye+DkZ0GFwugK7Mt0IMvmxcwp96Y80hfz2AAjBl8mVXxJVwxHh9VMg3RD2t3ULkEXBJxjwoDZVJKKr0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745284750; c=relaxed/simple; bh=eP9ll7giGUWiL/szu57fjosnt0vGjzvon7UdDIRlSyQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=DwL4yqxTu+lBEyqop8yDek+iTQVQqlKHo39x5A4krAohIn301dUtqJU26c59w/f2YRQXmWspa8PFPf0RL5rIz3my48drToS5cJhQX3p+e3k6iTxrEN89MacZyHEaU0vpLoQ5MoJZoOoCCGwmna2YkPgg72SRS58KuUmOPaRA0xA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=I77RryVh; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="I77RryVh" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DC476C4CEE4; Tue, 22 Apr 2025 01:19:08 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1745284748; bh=eP9ll7giGUWiL/szu57fjosnt0vGjzvon7UdDIRlSyQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=I77RryVhwIKu8+tKW9NNVt3+RfUNmS3w5F0QEe+CcVq3lY+7Fz5LRkwGYBlpEnU09 7/1wDdRtRNrBkt9DPdYSNxjHFzOvSk3/Vc6WuFI118GmNOAqsmlhqHYG6wfqsLHNVZ SZXU2ov+kNxI8DPd/i7IoUHQQLYEDCct+0dCWiDB72Qq2qS3UjTvmzdWh4rxTvRsUY iSttD1+WwC1WJSv9Un0fkfLshs46Xm9a1zVSuVYLyLtpGOmKRAl9w5Tj3x8rS1pQtG oBHV17V5nnYIPDk3zRkmCk2trCS2dDDdq6xdSYXZ0KxEbW4K2F4BuBC3SFypcKiOCk xQSquRSsu5DeA== Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2025 18:19:08 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Jens Axboe Cc: cem@kernel.org, hch@lst.de, shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, mcgrof@kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, willy@infradead.org, hch@infradead.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCHSET V2] block/xfs: bdev page cache bug fixes for 6.15 Message-ID: <20250422011908.GV25675@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: <174525589013.2138337.16473045486118778580.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs> <8cb99c46-d362-4158-aa1e-882f7e0c304a@kernel.dk> <98e7e90e-0ebe-4cbc-96f3-ce7f536d8884@kernel.dk> <20250421205116.GF25700@frogsfrogsfrogs> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 02:53:42PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 4/21/25 2:51 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 02:26:54PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > >> On 4/21/25 2:24 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: > >>> On 4/21/25 11:18 AM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > >>>> Hi all, > >>>> > >>>> Here are a handful of bugfixes for 6.15. The first patch fixes a race > >>>> between set_blocksize and block device pagecache manipulation; the rest > >>>> removes XFS' usage of set_blocksize since it's unnecessary. > >>>> > >>>> If you're going to start using this code, I strongly recommend pulling > >>>> from my git trees, which are linked below. > >>>> > >>>> With a bit of luck, this should all go splendidly. > >>>> Comments and questions are, as always, welcome. > >>> > >>> block changes look good to me - I'll tentatively queue those up. > >> > >> Hmm looks like it's built on top of other changes in your branch, > >> doesn't apply cleanly. > > > > Yeah, I'm still waiting for hch (or anyone) to RVB patches 2 and 3. > > Maybe I wasn't 100% clear, but what I mean is that patches 1 and 2 don't > apply to the upstream kernel, as they are sitting on top of other > patches that block block/bdev.c in your tree. So even if acked, they > can't go in as-is. Well they can, I'd just have to hand apply them. > Which isn't the end of the world, but the dependency wasn't clear (to > me, at least) in the sent out patches. Oh! Silly me, I forgot that there were debug patches. Will attach Luis' review tags, rebase, and resend. Sorry about that. :/ --D > -- > Jens Axboe >