Re: [PATH 0/9] xfs: fixes for 3.10-rc4

Ben Myers
2013-05-29T19:45:22Z

Hey Eric,

On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 02:27:18PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 5/29/13 2:01 PM, Ben Myers wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 09:54:24AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> <giant snip>
>
> >> I'd much prefer that we don't have to add code to 3.11 to reject any
> >> CRC-enabled filesystem without any feature bits set because we don't
> >> support a broken remote attr format that was fixed weeks before 3.10
> >> released but was not allowed to be fixed in 3.10. That's just crazy
> >> from any release management perspective you care to look at it from.
> >
> > So would I.
> >
> >> Ben, if the problem is that you can't review all the fixes in a timely
> >> manner, then we can fix that. I'm sure that Mark, Eric and Brian can
> >> help review the code if this is the sticking point.
> >
> > Reviews are always welcome...
>
> But it won't matter for the sake of this argument, sounds like?

Reviews will certainly help...

> > A worse outcome is that I pull in this code and something goes very
> > wrong for the thousands of users of 3.10 with existing non-crc XFS
> > filesystems. A feature bit and some inconvenience for a few XFS
> > developers and testers is a safer choice.
>
> Your concern (rightly) seems to be stability for non-crc users, so:
>
> I'll review these patches with a special eye towards if/how they
> affect any non-crc codepaths. If it's wholly contained in crc
> code, you can merge them without fear. Sound like a deal?

...but my primary concern is the content of the patches.

If we can show that a given patch is relevant, of low risk to non-crc users,
and has been adequately tested, I'm game.

Thanks,
Ben