Re: state of the cvs tree

David Chinner
2007-09-13T23:48:52Z

On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 12:40:00PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 09:05:15AM +1000, Mark Goodwin wrote:
> >
> >
> > Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > >looks like the cvs tree is broken currently - fs/xfs/ is merged up to
> > >2.6.23-rc, but everything else is still at 2.6.22-rc state leading to
> > >various compile failures.
> >
> > I think Tim is in the middle of the .23 update and still has some more
> > to push in. Tim?
> >
> > What else do you (or anyone for that matter) have in the pipeline for XFS?
> > Whilst we're taking huge patches and cleanups, let's get them all in asap.
>
> I have a long pipeline waiting, but as Dave said most of that really
> shouldn't go into 2.6.24.
>
> There's one patch from me that I sent a long time ago that's a trivial
> cleanup and should probably go into 2.6.24 still, that's
>
> "[PATCH] kill unused IOMAP_EOF flag"

Ah, that's still sitting in my tree from a past life. It fell through
the cracks, I think. It should go in to .24

> One thing that is in my alreayd submitted queue that should go into CVS
> ASAP after a small review is:
>
> "[PATCH] kill probe_* sysctl leftovers"

*nod*. yeah, that's pretty trivial so should go as well.

> this is stuff that never was in mainline, so putting it in seems fine.
>
> Then I have a patch from Eric sitting in the front of my queue,
>
> "[PATCH V2] refactor xfs_mountfs for clarity & stack savings"
>
> which might be a little too big for 2.6.24, but should at least go into
> CVS ASAP. I think Eric would be really happy to see it in 2.6.24 aswell
> because that means FC8 could actually mount xfs out of the box without
> running out of stack or something.

Yeah, that's been floating about for a bit and has been tested in
FC8 so seems like a no-brainer for .24.

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group