Re: xfs: Assertion failed in xfs_ag_resv_init()

Andre Noll
2019-05-01T17:51:33Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2334 bytes --]

On Wed, May 01, 19:15, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote
> On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 06:59:33PM +0200, Andre Noll wrote:
> > On Wed, May 01, 08:36, Darrick J. Wong wrote
> > > > > You could send this patch to the stable list, but my guess is that
> > > > > they'd prefer a straight backport of all three commits...
> > > >
> > > > Hm, cherry-picking the first commit onto 4.9,171 already gives
> > > > four conflicting files. The conflicts are trivial to resolve (git
> > > > cherry-pick -xX theirs 21ec54168b36 does it), but that doesn't
> > > > compile because xfs_btree_query_all() is missing. So e9a2599a249ed
> > > > (xfs: create a function to query all records in a btree) is needed as
> > > > well. But then, applying 86210fbebae (xfs: move various type verifiers
> > > > to common file) on top of that gives non-trivial conflicts.
> > >
> > > Ah, I suspected that might happen. Backports are hard. :(
> > >
> > > I suppose one saving grace of the patch you sent is that it'll likely
> > > break the build if anyone ever /does/ attempt a backport of those first
> > > two commits. Perhaps that is the most practical way forward.
> > >
> > > > So, for automatic backporting we would need to cherry-pick even more,
> > > > and each backported commit should be tested of course. Given this, do
> > > > you still think Greg prefers a rather large set of straight backports
> > > > over the simple commit that just pulls in the missing function?
> > >
> > > I think you'd have to ask him that, if you decide not to send
> > > yesterday's patch.
> >
> > Let's try. I've added a sentence to the commit message which explains
> > why a straight backport is not practical, and how to proceed if anyone
> > wants to backport the earlier commits.
> >
> > Greg: Under the given circumstances, would you be willing to accept
> > the patch below for 4.9?
>
> If the xfs maintainers say this is ok, it is fine with me.

Darrick said, he's in favor of the patch, so I guess I can add his
Acked-by. Would you also like to see the ack from Dave (the author
of the original commit)?

Anything else that needs to be changed?

Thanks
Andre
--
Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology
Max-Planck-Ring 5, 72076 Tübingen, Germany. Phone: (+49) 7071 601 829
http://people.tuebingen.mpg.de/maan/

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]