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 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B5C47F37 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 17:35:01 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF376AC01C for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 15:34:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.131]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id OF8bGKwEFpNBNPvD for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 15:34:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 08:34:52 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: check LSN ordering for v5 superblocks during recovery Message-ID: <20130828223452.GQ12779@dastard> References: <1377688967-6480-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1377688967-6480-3-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <521E625A.2070109@sgi.com> <20130828210223.GO12779@dastard> <521E6680.80105@sgi.com> <20130828213126.GP12779@dastard> <521E6F09.9010004@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <521E6F09.9010004@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: Mark Tinguely Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 04:43:37PM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote: > On 08/28/13 16:31, Dave Chinner wrote: > >On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 04:07:12PM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote: > >>On 08/28/13 16:02, Dave Chinner wrote: > >>>On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 03:49:30PM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote: > >>>>On 08/28/13 06:22, Dave Chinner wrote: > >>>>>From: Dave Chinner > >>>> > >>>>Looks good. Nice to get into Linux 3.12 and possibly back to stable. > >>> > >>>Why stable? It's v5 only code, and everyon knows that is still in > >>>the experimental stage.... > >> > >>yep. > > > >That doesn't answer my question. You had to have some reason for > >suggesting a possible stable backport for this code after reviewing > >it, and I'm interested to know what it was... > > > >Cheers, > > > >Dave. > > No thought that it would be nice to get it into Linux 3.12 and if > Brian or anyone wants to review it, then it needs to be done soon. > > my "yep" was a terse agreeing with your point. > > Yep, this problem has been around forever. > Yep, this problem was found/confirmed by your verifier. > Yep, this problem can only be fixed this way in superblock v5. > Yep, I had blinders on and was not thinking this to experimental code > so it does not matter to push it back. Ok, all good then. :) Thanks for explaining in more detail, Mark. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs