From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q6BMhDH8244885 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:43:14 -0500 Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:48:22 -0500 From: Ben Myers Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] xfs: regression fixes for 3.5-rc7 Message-ID: <20120711224822.GQ10196@sgi.com> References: <1342042843-1773-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1342042843-1773-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Hey Dave, On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 07:40:41AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > These two patches need to go to Linus before 3.5 is released. The > first fixes the btree cursor leak properly, and the second fixes a > significant performance regression reported by Mel Gorman. Can you > review them and send them onwards to Linus? I have some test exposure on the first one, but not on the second. I'd rather have a known performance regression in 3.5 than start popping stacks again this late toward the end of the rc cycle. I suggest that #2 go in for the 3.6 merge window and back to 3.5 via -stable. Any other opinions? I'll feel better about if after some testing, so I'll get tests running asap. What testing have you and Mel done? IMO we should also consider "xfs: prevent recursion in xfs_buf_iorequest", from Christoph. Regards, Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs