Re: [PATCH v2] xfs: preserve i_rdev when recycling a reclaimable inode

[Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 04:33:15PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 3:11 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 02:46:09PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> >> OK, found the patches the fix soft lockups in generic/269 and
> >> assertion in generic/232, so expunging those 2 tests from v4.15.y
> >> test runs.
> >
> > Which patches are those?  We should probably backport them to 4.15-stable.
> 
> Probably, but I guess Darrick has those in his TODO.
> 
> There is this series that refers to failure in generic/232:
> https://marc.info/?l=linux-xfs&m=151701545720824&w=2
> 
> These 2 commits refer to generic/269 specifically in commit message:
>  70c57dcd606f xfs: skip CoW writes past EOF when writeback races with truncate
>  be78ff0e7277 xfs: recheck reflink / dirty page status before freeing
> CoW reservations
> and the thread on the second commit also mentions generic/270
> (I found out the hard way that it also soft locks).
> 
> But there are surely more patches for stable in master.
> I recon CC: stable and/or Fixes: tags could have been helpful,
> but I don't see any of those in v4.16-rcX from the core xfs developers.

AS I always say: if you want to maintain a stable backport kernel
with all the fixes that go into the bleeding edge, you're more than
welcome to do it.

Everyone else is flat out just keeping up with on going development
and fixing bugs in the kernel as it's moving forward. So if you have
the need for stable backports, please keep backporting patches you
need, testing them and asking the stable maintainers to include
them.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com