From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76BA1C43219 for ; Wed, 1 May 2019 19:28:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40B2220652 for ; Wed, 1 May 2019 19:28:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="LGik3DwW" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726096AbfEAT2n (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 May 2019 15:28:43 -0400 Received: from userp2120.oracle.com ([156.151.31.85]:59458 "EHLO userp2120.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726088AbfEAT2m (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 May 2019 15:28:42 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (userp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x41JJiwf014200; Wed, 1 May 2019 19:28:27 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : in-reply-to; s=corp-2018-07-02; bh=axQU61zNPf2pA7LWLjeMxuK4W1F18U79UO1y3Yex6/U=; b=LGik3DwWRRn92qo7GPgjVrPBjoBHtY6KiV/5NAXbThbiiTgD0FwoVjsivhtCFqm16dQR FV3yFx3HaID6jJBkED3EO1WhginLsHCZmAIqz/NGpMs9B7tfObvHa98sa/0LFyKgV4Vv TC8RlRpC+muUh22bVUijgRNLwxFRVtoZdvbXXxh34xZSa7afgN7YOhY/o+oRixn2j3mS KHdyL9mTIUxU4DEtrnAmBGEHPp93o0Y+AWUNqP4vPbHJbi02p0PRkhbG2a38aZiDQHot m8MIdI6bGrBq3vo71uiflO2anr5TdC5I9Un4GdW9lzzyxji353dpU5OUHQ5jSF5LVRtA UQ== Received: from userp3030.oracle.com (userp3030.oracle.com [156.151.31.80]) by userp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2s6xhymktn-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 01 May 2019 19:28:27 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (userp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x41JRg86037907; Wed, 1 May 2019 19:28:27 GMT Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by userp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2s6xhhe5j0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 01 May 2019 19:28:26 +0000 Received: from abhmp0003.oracle.com (abhmp0003.oracle.com [141.146.116.9]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id x41JSNYt026378; Wed, 1 May 2019 19:28:24 GMT Received: from localhost (/67.169.218.210) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 01 May 2019 12:28:23 -0700 Date: Wed, 1 May 2019 12:28:22 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Andre Noll Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Dave Chinner Subject: Re: xfs: Assertion failed in xfs_ag_resv_init() Message-ID: <20190501192822.GM5207@magnolia> References: <20190430151151.GF5207@magnolia> <20190430162506.GZ2780@tuebingen.mpg.de> <20190430174042.GH5207@magnolia> <20190430190525.GB2780@tuebingen.mpg.de> <20190430191825.GF5217@magnolia> <20190430210724.GD2780@tuebingen.mpg.de> <20190501153643.GL5207@magnolia> <20190501165933.GF2780@tuebingen.mpg.de> <20190501171529.GB28949@kroah.com> <20190501175129.GH2780@tuebingen.mpg.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20190501175129.GH2780@tuebingen.mpg.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=9244 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1905010121 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=9244 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1905010120 Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 07:51:29PM +0200, Andre Noll wrote: > On Wed, May 01, 19:15, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote > > On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 06:59:33PM +0200, Andre Noll wrote: > > > On Wed, May 01, 08:36, Darrick J. Wong wrote > > > > > > You could send this patch to the stable list, but my guess is that > > > > > > they'd prefer a straight backport of all three commits... > > > > > > > > > > Hm, cherry-picking the first commit onto 4.9,171 already gives > > > > > four conflicting files. The conflicts are trivial to resolve (git > > > > > cherry-pick -xX theirs 21ec54168b36 does it), but that doesn't > > > > > compile because xfs_btree_query_all() is missing. So e9a2599a249ed > > > > > (xfs: create a function to query all records in a btree) is needed as > > > > > well. But then, applying 86210fbebae (xfs: move various type verifiers > > > > > to common file) on top of that gives non-trivial conflicts. > > > > > > > > Ah, I suspected that might happen. Backports are hard. :( > > > > > > > > I suppose one saving grace of the patch you sent is that it'll likely > > > > break the build if anyone ever /does/ attempt a backport of those first > > > > two commits. Perhaps that is the most practical way forward. > > > > > > > > > So, for automatic backporting we would need to cherry-pick even more, > > > > > and each backported commit should be tested of course. Given this, do > > > > > you still think Greg prefers a rather large set of straight backports > > > > > over the simple commit that just pulls in the missing function? > > > > > > > > I think you'd have to ask him that, if you decide not to send > > > > yesterday's patch. > > > > > > Let's try. I've added a sentence to the commit message which explains > > > why a straight backport is not practical, and how to proceed if anyone > > > wants to backport the earlier commits. > > > > > > Greg: Under the given circumstances, would you be willing to accept > > > the patch below for 4.9? > > > > If the xfs maintainers say this is ok, it is fine with me. > > Darrick said, he's in favor of the patch, so I guess I can add his > Acked-by. Would you also like to see the ack from Dave (the author > of the original commit)? FWIW it seems fine to me, though Dave [cc'd] might have stronger opinions... Acked-by: Darrick J. Wong --D > > Anything else that needs to be changed? > > Thanks > Andre > -- > Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology > Max-Planck-Ring 5, 72076 Tübingen, Germany. Phone: (+49) 7071 601 829 > http://people.tuebingen.mpg.de/maan/