Hi,
we've accumulated some fixes during the last week, some of them were in
the works for a longer time but there are some newer ones too. Most of
the fixes have a reproducer and fix user visible problems, also
candidates for stable kernels. They IMHO qualify for a late rc, though I
did not expect that many.
The commit date may differ from author date because I added the stable
and Fixes tags where missing. There are no merge conflicts against
current master.
Please pull, thanks.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The following changes since commit a6aa10c70bf72fb28504cb5de5deac75da78b0f5:
Btrfs: send, fix missing truncate for inode with prealloc extent past eof (2018-05-02 11:55:29 +0200)
are available in the Git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kdave/linux.git for-4.17-rc5-tag
for you to fetch changes up to 02ee654d3a04563c67bfe658a05384548b9bb105:
btrfs: fix crash when trying to resume balance without the resume flag (2018-05-17 14:38:24 +0200)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Anand Jain (1):
btrfs: fix crash when trying to resume balance without the resume flag
Filipe Manana (2):
Btrfs: fix xattr loss after power failure
Btrfs: fix duplicate extents after fsync of file with prealloc extents
Liu Bo (1):
btrfs: fix reading stale metadata blocks after degraded raid1 mounts
Misono Tomohiro (1):
btrfs: property: Set incompat flag if lzo/zstd compression is set
Nikolay Borisov (2):
btrfs: Split btrfs_del_delalloc_inode into 2 functions
btrfs: Fix delalloc inodes invalidation during transaction abort
Robbie Ko (1):
Btrfs: send, fix invalid access to commit roots due to concurrent snapshotting
fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 22 ++++++--
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 2 +
fs/btrfs/disk-io.c | 26 ++++++----
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 13 +++--
fs/btrfs/props.c | 12 +++--
fs/btrfs/tree-log.c | 144 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 9 ++++
7 files changed, 180 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 8:21 AM David Sterba <[email protected]> wrote:
> They IMHO qualify for a late rc, though I did not expect that many.
Especially with the tree-log.c changes being fairly big, I took a look, and
I have to say that I appreciate (a) the warning in the pull request and (b)
the extensive log messages explaining the problems these patches fix.
I obviously still prefer to see only small and simple one-liners just
before I'm making ready to release rc6, but in the absence of oneliners I
do appreciate good explanations.
Thanks,
Linus