From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 893507FA1 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2013 13:19:14 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 13:19:10 -0500 From: Ben Myers Subject: Re: [PATCH 51/50] xfs: add xfs sb v4 support for dirent filetype field Message-ID: <20130822181910.GP5262@sgi.com> References: <1376304611-22994-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20130819201940.516942026@sgi.com> <5212AA1D.3000809@sandeen.net> <52137D3D.8060205@sgi.com> <20130821000624.GO6023@dastard> <20130821170336.GJ5262@sgi.com> <20130822020226.GR6023@dastard> <20130822161456.GB23510@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130822161456.GB23510@sgi.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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Geoffrey Wehrman , Dave Chinner , Eric Sandeen , Mark Tinguely Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Gents, On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:14:56AM -0500, Geoffrey Wehrman wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:02:26PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > | I'm very, very, very unhappy about how this situation is unfolding. > > As am I. Mark provided some mkfs code to test the v4 feature bit with, and it worked fine for me. Given that we are protected by a feature bit, I feel that pulling in the v4 feature is considerably less risky than what we did in 3.10, with Dave still cleaning up his mess in -rc6, so go ahead and call me reckless: I've pulled in both v4 and v5 versions of this code. Mark, please post your mkfs code ASAP, even though Dave hasn't reposted his userspace series yet. Everybody gets his code in and nobody is happy. -Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs