From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751118AbbJAWr7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:47:59 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:8722 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750762AbbJAWr6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:47:58 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,620,1437462000"; d="scan'208";a="656202455" Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 16:47:45 -0600 From: Ross Zwisler To: Dave Chinner Cc: Ross Zwisler , xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, willy@linux.intel.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org, jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] Revert "mm: take i_mmap_lock in unmap_mapping_range() for DAX" Message-ID: <20151001224745.GB7634@linux.intel.com> Mail-Followup-To: Ross Zwisler , Dave Chinner , xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, willy@linux.intel.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1443685599-4843-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1443685599-4843-2-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20151001202729.GA23495@linux.intel.com> <20151001223240.GI27164@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151001223240.GI27164@dastard> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 08:32:40AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > I couldn't work out what set of commits I needed to revert to get a > clean revert, so I just reverted the commits and hacked out the > revert failures to what looked ok. Feel free to send me a clean set > of reverts, and I'll replace these patches with them... :) Will do. I will queue the reverts in my external tree & ask Linus to pull them into v4.3 so we don't ship with deadlocks. > > Also, if I understood your previous mails correctly you were targeting the > > first two revert patches for v4.3 so we get back to v4.2 level locking, and > > the rest of the series will target v4.4, correct? How does this work? Do the > > patches need to be split into two series and tested separately? > > Test it and push the reverts however you like. I don't care how the > reverts get to 4.3 - I'll be carrying them locally in my trees from > now and so my development and testing is now unaffected by the bugs > that are in the 4.3 code. If you aren't going to push them for 4.3 > then I'd suggest that they go to linus along with the rest of the > XFS changes in this series. > > FWIW, I'm quite happy to host all the pending DAX changes in a > public git tree and ask for it to be included in linux-next. It's > probably a good idea to do this because it makes it much easier to > co-ordinate merges when we are touching multiple subsystems (ext4, > xfs, dax, mm, etc). And it will help prevent the "patches molder on > the list until Andrew hoovers them up" problem and so prevent this > situation from happening in the future... No objections from me. :) I agree that it would be nice to have a central home for all the DAX patches.