From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:39372 "EHLO userp2130.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727354AbeJECif (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Oct 2018 22:38:35 -0400 Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2018 12:43:44 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] xfsprogs-4.19: transaction cleanups Message-ID: <20181004194344.GA6718@magnolia> References: <153841345236.27952.5050172703525712660.stgit@magnolia> <6233116e-24bd-bd7c-d19d-883887953335@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6233116e-24bd-bd7c-d19d-883887953335@sandeen.net> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Eric Sandeen Cc: sandeen@redhat.com, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 02:13:19PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > > On 10/1/18 12:04 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > Here are seven cleanups to the userspace transaction code that make the > > commit and roll code more closely resemble their kernel counterparts, > > and fix a number of problems where client code did not check the return > > values of the transaction functions. The eighth patch fixes a bug in > > xfs_scrub_all. The patches should apply to Eric's libxfs-4.19-sync > > branch. > > > > --D > > > > You're going to hate me (or maybe not) but in the end I decided to stop > being stubborn and bring in these patches before the libxfs-4.19 up[date, > as I should have from the start. You don't have to rebase them again tho, > I already got through it. I'll diff to your tree to make sure nothing went > haywire. But a lot of stuff went 'haywire'... most of which I think is in patch 3 and patch 4 of this series. Patch 8 is also new, though not related. Oh well, see libxfs-4.19-sync-3 in my djwong/xfsprogs-dev.git tree on korg. (Oh and I found another annoying bug in xfs_io's dedupe command; will send patch for that when the dust settles...) --D > For the series with my out of order backporting tweaks, > > Reviewed-by: Eric Sandeen > > Thanks, this was great work. > > -Eric