Re: [PATCH 5.15 CANDIDATE 0/9] xfs stable candidate patches for 5.15.y (part 3)

["Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 11:11:27AM -0700, Leah Rumancik wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 07:44:25AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 10:44:29AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 12:05 AM Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 01:29:50PM -0700, Leah Rumancik wrote:
> > > > > Hi again,
> > > > >
> > > > > This set contains fixes from 5.16 to 5.17. The normal testing was run
> > > > > for this set with no regressions found.
> > > > >
> > > > > I included some fixes for online scrub. I am not sure if this
> > > > > is in use for 5.15 though so please let me know if these should be
> > > > > dropped.
> > > > >
> > > > > Some refactoring patches were included in this set as dependencies:
> > > > >
> > > > > bf2307b19513 xfs: fold perag loop iteration logic into helper function
> > > > >     dependency for f1788b5e5ee25bedf00bb4d25f82b93820d61189
> > > > > f1788b5e5ee2 xfs: rename the next_agno perag iteration variable
> > > > >     dependency for 8ed004eb9d07a5d6114db3e97a166707c186262d
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Leah
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Brian Foster (4):
> > > > >   xfs: fold perag loop iteration logic into helper function
> > > > >   xfs: rename the next_agno perag iteration variable
> > > > >   xfs: terminate perag iteration reliably on agcount
> > > > >   xfs: fix perag reference leak on iteration race with growfs
> > > > >
> > > > > Dan Carpenter (1):
> > > > >   xfs: prevent a WARN_ONCE() in xfs_ioc_attr_list()
> > > > >
> > > > > Darrick J. Wong (4):
> > > > >   xfs: fix maxlevels comparisons in the btree staging code
> > > >
> > > > Up to this point,
> > > > Acked-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
> > > >
> > > > >   xfs: fix incorrect decoding in xchk_btree_cur_fsbno
> > > > >   xfs: fix quotaoff mutex usage now that we don't support disabling it
> > > > >   xfs: fix a bug in the online fsck directory leaf1 bestcount check
> > > >
> > > > No objections to these last three, since they're legitimate fixes for
> > > > bugs in 5.15, but I would advise y'all not to worry too much about fixes
> > > > for EXPERIMENTAL features.
> > 
> > Also, to clarify -- if you /do/ want to pick up the scrub fixes, then
> > yes, the Acked-by above does apply to the entire set.  I don't know if
> > you have people running (experimental) scrub, but I don't know that you
> > **don't**. :)
> 
> These fixes aren't a priority over here so I'll postpone scrub fixes in
> the future since it doesn't seem like people care. For this set, is
> there coverage in xfstests for them? If so, I'll go ahead and keep them,
> but if not, I'll just drop them.

Nothing other than the general fuzzing tests.  You might as well ignore
them.

--D

> - Leah
> 
> > 
> > > FWIW, from the set above, I only picked Dan Carpenter's fix for 5.10.
> > > I'll include it in one of the following updates.
> > 
> > <nod>
> > 
> > --D
> > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Amir.