From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mx2.netapp.com ([216.240.18.37]:47481 "EHLO mx2.netapp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932353Ab1JRQ07 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:26:59 -0400 Subject: Re: The patch that wouldn't die From: Trond Myklebust To: Jim Rees Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 09:26:43 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20111018134935.GA17831@umich.edu> References: <20111018134935.GA17831@umich.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-ID: <1318955203.3213.1.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Fixed. I haven't yet cut an official nfs-for-3.2, so I've just rebased nfs-for-next and removed that particular patch. Cheers Trond On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 09:49 -0400, Jim Rees wrote: > Boaz, try to remain calm. > > Trond, please remove this patch from your nfs-for-next branch. I can send a > revert patch if you like. > > Uh-oh, I see it's been sent to stable too. > > commit f0574a5592deb1f99fa583c525d01e7fa131f430 > Author: Peng Tao > Date: Thu Sep 22 21:50:13 2011 -0400 > > pnfsblock: init pg_bsize properly > > pg_bsize is server->wsize/rsize by default. We would want to use the lseg > length. > > Signed-off-by: Peng Tao > Signed-off-by: Jim Rees > Cc: stable@kernel.org [3.0] > Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust > > Explanation follows: > > Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 08:22:45 -0400 > From: Jim Rees > Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] pnfsblock: init pg_bsize properly > To: Boaz Harrosh > Cc: Trond Myklebust , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, > peter honeyman > > Boaz Harrosh wrote: > > On 09/23/2011 04:50 AM, Jim Rees wrote: > > From: Peng Tao > > > > pg_bsize is server->wsize/rsize by default. We would want to use the lseg > > length. > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Tao > > Signed-off-by: Jim Rees > > If you want to get lazy about this patch and take the easy way out. > The least you can do is supply the same fix to that other place > that has the same bug. > > This is not nice. You have identified a deficiency in the generic > layer, You know that objects would have the same bug, (because I told you) > and you just don't care. I have spent plenty of times slaving over > blocks code when changing or fixing generic layer. (And Benny even more > then me) > > And when you will actually send a patch that does exactly the same in > two places, which access only generic members, you might see that it > might be better to fix it in a single place at the generic layer. > > NACK. I'm ok with getting lazy like below, but only if you also > add the same code to objio_osd.c > > Sorry, I sent the wrong patch. Trond, please drop this one. -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer NetApp Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com www.netapp.com