From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46824 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751817AbeCPL7U (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Mar 2018 07:59:20 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 07:59:11 -0400 From: Brian Foster Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: detect agfl count corruption and reset agfl Message-ID: <20180316115910.GA51225@bfoster.bfoster> References: <20180314171724.41951-1-bfoster@redhat.com> <20180314181218.GR4865@magnolia> <20180315103839.GA44732@bfoster.bfoster> <20180315222605.GK18129@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180315222605.GK18129@dastard> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Dave Chinner Cc: Dave Chiluk , "Darrick J. Wong" , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 09:26:05AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 06:38:39AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 03:42:50PM -0500, Dave Chiluk wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Darrick J. Wong > > > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 01:17:24PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > > ... > > > > > > Reviewed-by Dave Chiluk > > > > > > I'm also assuming this will get submitted back to the linux-stable > > > trees as the agfl packing change is already causing issues in the > > > stable trees. If you do not intend to push it into the linux-stable > > > trees let me know and I'll take care of at least the major ones. > > > > > > > Yeah, I can cc stable in the next post along with the other minor fixes. > > My question is how far back should this fix go? Was the plan to only go > > back to v4.5 because that is where the packing fix first went in? Or > > should this go back further because it looks like the packing fix was > > backported to v3.10: > > > > $ git show 96f859d52bcb1 > > commit 96f859d52bcb1c6ea6f3388d39862bf7143e2f30 > > Author: Darrick J. Wong > > Date: Mon Jan 4 16:13:21 2016 +1100 > > > > libxfs: pack the agfl header structure so XFS_AGFL_SIZE is correct > > > > ... > > > > cc: # 3.10 - 4.4 > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong > > Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner > > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner > > 3.10 was when the problem was first introduced. I have no idea > whether it got backported that far but the stable kernel > maintainers, so you'll have to manually audit all current long-term > stable kernels to determine what kernels need backports. > The earliest I saw it backported was to 3.16, which looks like Luis had perhaps done that one. Otherwise, the kernels Darrick pointed out seem to have the fix. Brian > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@fromorbit.com > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html