* XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes is incorrect
@ 2011-06-07 11:42 Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
2011-06-07 11:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG @ 2011-06-07 11:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xfs
Hi,
it seems that a bug was backported into the latest 2.6.32 longterm
stable kernel. Now the patch "XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes is
incorrect" needs to get backported to 2.6.32.
Who can help? Who is responsible?
Please CC me i'm not on list.
--
Greets,
Stefan
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes is incorrect
2011-06-07 11:42 XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes is incorrect Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
@ 2011-06-07 11:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-07 12:58 ` Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2011-06-07 11:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG; +Cc: xfs
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 01:42:28PM +0200, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it seems that a bug was backported into the latest 2.6.32 longterm
> stable kernel. Now the patch "XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes
> is incorrect" needs to get backported to 2.6.32.
>
> Who can help? Who is responsible?
For -stable releases no one really is. If you want to help you can
backport it and send it to the stable mailinglist.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes is incorrect
2011-06-07 11:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
@ 2011-06-07 12:58 ` Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
2011-06-07 13:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG @ 2011-06-07 12:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: xfs
>> it seems that a bug was backported into the latest 2.6.32 longterm
>> stable kernel. Now the patch "XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes
>> is incorrect" needs to get backported to 2.6.32.
>>
>> Who can help? Who is responsible?
>
> For -stable releases no one really is. If you want to help you can
> backport it and send it to the stable mailinglist.
Sorry i can't. I'm not a kernel hacker. But i think a real bug /
showstopper should be fixed in a longterm stable kernel.
Redhat seems to have fixed it on it's own:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642680
Sadly they haven't provided a patch.
Greets Stefan
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes is incorrect
2011-06-07 12:58 ` Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
@ 2011-06-07 13:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-07 13:48 ` Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
2011-06-07 14:00 ` Dave Howorth
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2011-06-07 13:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, xfs
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 02:58:32PM +0200, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
> Sorry i can't. I'm not a kernel hacker. But i think a real bug /
> showstopper should be fixed in a longterm stable kernel.
Linux 2.6.32 isn't really something supported by us. It's not just a
very old codebase, but also one where a lot of the XFS code was pretty
much in flux. If you want supported old releases work use one of
the commercially supported one like RedHat or SuSE.
> Redhat seems to have fixed it on it's own:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642680
I suspect the upstream commit you want is
081003fff467ea0e727f66d5d435b4f473a789b3, but I can't gurantee this
actually applies to the 2.6.32 codebase.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes is incorrect
2011-06-07 13:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
@ 2011-06-07 13:48 ` Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
2011-06-07 14:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-07 14:00 ` Dave Howorth
1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG @ 2011-06-07 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: xfs
Am 07.06.2011 15:34, schrieb Christoph Hellwig:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 02:58:32PM +0200, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
> Linux 2.6.32 isn't really something supported by us. It's not just a
> very old codebase, but also one where a lot of the XFS code was pretty
> much in flux. If you want supported old releases work use one of
> the commercially supported one like RedHat or SuSE.
OK so my thought was totally wrong. I thought the longterm stable
releases will still get bugfixed by SGI or whoever wrote the stuff.
Sorry for that then. But what is then the idea of a longterm stable?
>> Redhat seems to have fixed it on it's own:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642680
>
> I suspect the upstream commit you want is
> 081003fff467ea0e727f66d5d435b4f473a789b3, but I can't gurantee this
> actually applies to the 2.6.32 codebase.
No it doesn't. I already tried to implement it into current 2.6.32.41 code.
Greets Stefan
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes is incorrect
2011-06-07 13:48 ` Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
@ 2011-06-07 14:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2011-06-07 14:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG; +Cc: xfs
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 03:48:38PM +0200, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
> Am 07.06.2011 15:34, schrieb Christoph Hellwig:
> >On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 02:58:32PM +0200, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
> >Linux 2.6.32 isn't really something supported by us. It's not just a
> >very old codebase, but also one where a lot of the XFS code was pretty
> >much in flux. If you want supported old releases work use one of
> >the commercially supported one like RedHat or SuSE.
> OK so my thought was totally wrong. I thought the longterm stable
> releases will still get bugfixed by SGI or whoever wrote the stuff.
> Sorry for that then. But what is then the idea of a longterm stable?
I have no idea what the idea is, but it's clearly not viable for normal
kernel developers. Backporting code to age old releases and QAing it is
a major effort, and people generally don't do it unless they are paid
for it.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes is incorrect
2011-06-07 13:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-07 13:48 ` Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
@ 2011-06-07 14:00 ` Dave Howorth
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Dave Howorth @ 2011-06-07 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xfs
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Linux 2.6.32 isn't really something supported by us. It's not just a
> very old codebase, but also one where a lot of the XFS code was pretty
> much in flux. If you want supported old releases work use one of
> the commercially supported one like RedHat or SuSE.
2.6.32 is also the kernel in Ubuntu 10.04 LTS
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-06-07 14:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-06-07 11:42 XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes is incorrect Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
2011-06-07 11:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-07 12:58 ` Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
2011-06-07 13:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-07 13:48 ` Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
2011-06-07 14:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-07 14:00 ` Dave Howorth
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox