From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q8363CKX153389 for ; Mon, 3 Sep 2012 01:03:13 -0500 Received: from ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.131]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id yCXGEil5G5p7YoJC for ; Sun, 02 Sep 2012 23:04:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2012 16:04:06 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/102]: xfs: 3.0.x stable kernel update Message-ID: <20120903060406.GA15292@dastard> References: <1345698180-13612-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20120901231019.GC6896@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120901231019.GC6896@infradead.org> 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: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 07:10:19PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > I've done a brief look over the patches this week and while I can't spot > anything wrong I'm defintively a bit concerned about the amount of churn > for a long term stable series. A lot of this does not seem to fit the > strict -stable criteria, and given that I've not really seen any major > issues with the current 3.0-stable codebase I'm wondering what the > guranteed gain vs the status quo is. You didn't troll the RH bugzilla ;) The XFS code base in RHEL6 is sitting at 3.0, and several of the problems that have workarounds in 3.0.x don't fix the problems reported (e.g. the log space hangs), while the fixes in the more recent mainline kernel do. I simply figured that I've got to do this much work to fix all the bugs reported in RHEL6 and given the code bases are almost identical I'd do a community service and push it to 3.0.x first. I'm quite happy not to push it to 3.0.x if the consensus is that it is too much churn. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs