public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14 V5]: xfs: remove the xfssyncd mess
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 16:03:15 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121011050314.GA2739@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121011023155.GX13214@sgi.com>

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 09:31:55PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote:
> Hey Dave,
> 
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 05:39:21PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 09:55:58PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > Hopefully the final version.
> > 
> > I am testing this new rev now... My v4 run over the weekend crashed but
> > unfortunately I wasn't able to get a stack trace.  We'll see what shakes out.
> 
> I'm still not sure what happened with the v4 run I mentioned.  Subsequent
> testing has shown this series to be solid with the new changes.  It is ready to
> go.
> 
> However, pulling this in right now will result in a merge commit from the
> upstream tree to ours later in the rc1 merge.  My understanding is that if
> Linus were to subsequently pull from our tree, the merge commit would cause
> some ugliness in upstream commit history.  See:
> 
> http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2009-04/msg00014.html


I'm not sure that's relevant. The problem ther was this sort of
behaviour:

	- merge mainline into XFS tree.
	- commit XFS stuff
	- merge mainline into XFS tree
	- commit XFS stuff
	.....
	- merge mainline into XFS tree
	- commit XFS stuff
	- pull request
	- merge mainline into XFS tree
	- commit XFS stuff
	<loop>

And so the changes in the XFS tree where not easy to discern from
the changes pull in from mainline. Indeed, look at the pull request
to see exactly waht Linus was complaining about:

http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2009-04/msg00009.html

Felix Blyakher (25):
     Merge branch 'master' of git+ssh://oss.sgi.com/oss/git/xfs/xfs
     [XFS] Warn on transaction in flight on read-only remount
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/.../torvalds/ linux-2.6
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/.../torvalds/ linux-2.6
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/.../torvalds/ linux-2.6 
     xfs: Update maintainers
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/.../torvalds/ linux-2.6 
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfs
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfs
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/.../torvalds/ linux-2.6 
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfs
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/.../torvalds/ linux-2.6 
     Revert "[XFS] use scalable vmap API"
     Revert "[XFS] remove old vmap cache"
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/.../torvalds/ linux-2.6
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/.../torvalds/ linux-2.6
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/.../torvalds/ linux-2.6 
     Fix xfs debug build breakage by pushing xfs_error.h after
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/.../torvalds/ linux-2.6 
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfs
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/.../torvalds/ linux-2.6 
     xfs: increase the maximum number of supported ACL entries
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/.../torvalds/ linux-2.6 
     Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfs
     Revert "xfs: increase the maximum number of supported ACL entries"

This is the mess that Linus was complaining about - not about a
single merge per release that is used to keep the tree tracking
mainlinei having a conflict in it.

Having a dev tree history something like:

	- commit XFS stuff
	- commit XFS stuff
	- merge -rc1 from mainline
	- commit XFS stuff
	- commit XFS stuff
	- commit XFS stuff
	......
	- commit XFS stuff
	- pull request
	- commit XFS stuff
	- commit XFS stuff
	<loop per release>

Isn't really the problem that Linus was talking about. Indeed, one
mainline merge per release is pretty much as expected, especially if
you have a tree that you do not rebase that is consistently
committed to....

> I haven't found a way around this, so that's why we're waiting until after the
> -rc1 fast-forward to pull this in.

Merges by themselves aren't bad - it's excessive, unnecessary
use of them that causes problems. :/

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2012-10-11  5:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-10-08 10:55 [PATCH 00/14 V5]: xfs: remove the xfssyncd mess Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:55 ` [PATCH 01/14] xfs: xfs_syncd_stop must die Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 02/14] xfs: rationalise xfs_mount_wq users Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 03/14] xfs: don't run the sync work if the filesystem is read-only Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 04/14] xfs: sync work is now only periodic log work Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 05/14] xfs: Bring some sanity to log unmounting Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 06/14] xfs: xfs_sync_data is redundant Dave Chinner
2012-10-09 21:01   ` Ben Myers
2012-10-09 21:28     ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-09 21:41       ` Ben Myers
2012-10-09 22:23         ` Brian Foster
2012-10-09 22:54         ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 07/14] xfs: syncd workqueue is no more Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 08/14] xfs: xfs_sync_fsdata is redundant Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 09/14] xfs: move xfs_quiesce_attr() into xfs_super.c Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 10/14] xfs: xfs_quiesce_attr() should quiesce the log like unmount Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 11/14] xfs: rename xfs_sync.[ch] to xfs_icache.[ch] Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 12/14] xfs: move inode locking functions to xfs_inode.c Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 13/14] xfs: remove xfs_iget.c Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 10:56 ` [PATCH 14/14] xfs: only update the last_sync_lsn when a transaction completes Dave Chinner
2012-10-10 14:28   ` Ben Myers
2012-10-10 22:57     ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-08 22:39 ` [PATCH 00/14 V5]: xfs: remove the xfssyncd mess Ben Myers
2012-10-11  2:31   ` Ben Myers
2012-10-11  5:03     ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2012-10-16 18:19       ` Ben Myers
2012-10-10 21:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-10-11  1:51   ` Ben Myers
2012-10-16 19:19 ` Ben Myers
2012-10-17 19:24 ` Ben Myers

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20121011050314.GA2739@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=bpm@sgi.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox