Re: [PATCH v4 00/54] tree-in-dcache stuff

Al Viro
2026-01-29T03:22:01Z

On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 04:58:57PM -0800, Samuel Wu wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 8:58 PM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > Very interesting... Does 1544775687f0 (parent of e5bf5ee26663)
> > demonstrate that behaviour?
>
> Reverting only 1544775687f0 (functionfs: need to cancel ->reset_work
> in ->kill_sb()) does not fix the issue. With 6.19-rc7 as baseline, the
> simplest working recipe at the moment is with 6ca67378d0e7,
> c7747fafaba0, and e5bf5ee26663 reverted.

Sorry, I hadn't been clear enough: if you do
git switch --detach 1544775687f0
and build the resulting tree, does the breakage reproduce? What I want
to do is to split e5bf5ee26663 into smaller steps and see which one
introduces the breakage, but the starting point would be verify that
there's no breakage prior to that.

PS: v6.19-rc7 contains fc45aee66223 ("get rid of kill_litter_super()"),
and reverting 6ca67378d0e7 ("convert functionfs") would reintroduce
the call of that function in ffs_fs_kill_sb(), so the resulting tree
won't even build on any configs with functionfs enabledd; are you sure
that you'd been testing v6.19-rc7 + reverts of just these 3 commits?