From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: "Pranay Kr. Srivastava" <pranjas@gmail.com>
Cc: adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1]ext4: Fix WARN_ON_ONCE when marking buffer dirty
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 10:29:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160704142938.GB29557@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1467285150-15977-2-git-send-email-pranjas@gmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 02:12:30PM +0300, Pranay Kr. Srivastava wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Pranay Kr. Srivastava <pranjas@gmail.com>
The description for why the change is being made should go in the
commit. (No need to put the description in a separate cover letter.)
I ended up rewriting the commit description as follows, to make it
much more understandable:
ext4: Fix WARN_ON_ONCE in ext4_commit_super()
If there are racing calls to ext4_commit_super() it's possible for
another writeback of the superblock to result in the buffer being
marked with an error after we check if the buffer is marked as
having a write error and the buffer up-to-date flag is set again.
If that happens mark_buffer_dirty() can end up throwing a
WARN_ON_ONCE.
Fix this by moving this check to write before we call
write_buffer_dirty(), and keeping the buffer locked during this
whole sequence.
Signed-off-by: Pranay Kr. Srivastava <pranjas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Note that the one-line summary needs to carry as much information as
possible so someone who is scanning the commits using git log
--oneline has a chance of understanding it. This means the high-level
*why* of the commit, not a summary of what the changes in the C code.
Also note the increased context of when the misbehaviour could occur
in the commit description, which was missing in the cover letter.
When I'm processing patches, if I'm in a hurry, patches that require
extra work or which aren't Obviously Right, sometimes get deferred by
a few days. This patch fell in that category.
Adding to the commit descrtipion additional context and/or
instructions for how to reproduce the problem you are trying to
remediate will often make life much easier for me, and accelerate how
quickly I'll get to your patch.
Cheers,
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-04 14:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-30 11:12 [PATCH 0/1]ext4: Fix for WARN_ON_ONCE when marking buffer dirty Pranay Kr. Srivastava
2016-06-30 11:12 ` [PATCH 1/1]ext4: Fix " Pranay Kr. Srivastava
2016-07-04 7:09 ` Pranay Srivastava
2016-07-04 14:29 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2016-07-05 3:27 ` Pranay Srivastava
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160704142938.GB29557@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pranjas@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).