Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [git pull] vfs.git sysv pile
Date:   Mon, 27 Mar 2023 12:29:56 +0200
Message-ID: <3307436.0oRPG1VZx4@suse>
In-Reply-To: <20230320124725.pe4jqdsp4o47kmdp@quack3>
References: <Y/gugbqq858QXJBY@ZenIV> <4214717.mogB4TqSGs@suse>
 <20230320124725.pe4jqdsp4o47kmdp@quack3>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Precedence: bulk

On luned=EC 20 marzo 2023 13:47:25 CEST Jan Kara wrote:
> On Mon 20-03-23 12:18:38, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > On gioved=EC 16 marzo 2023 11:30:21 CET Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > > On gioved=EC 16 marzo 2023 10:00:35 CET Jan Kara wrote:
> > > > On Wed 15-03-23 19:08:57, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > > > > On mercoled=EC 1 marzo 2023 15:14:16 CET Al Viro wrote:

[snip]

> > > > > > I think I've pushed a demo patchset to vfs.git at some point ba=
ck=20
in
> > > > > > January... Yep - see #work.ext2 in there; completely untested,
> > > > > > though.

Al,

I reviewed and tested your patchset (please see below).

I think that you probably also missed Jan's last message about how you pref=
er=20
they to be treated.

Jan asked you whether you will submit these patches or he should just pull=
=20
your branch into his tree.

Please look below for my tags and Jan's question.

> > > > >=20
> > > > > The following commits from the VFS tree, #work.ext2 look good to =
me.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > f5b399373756 ("ext2: use offset_in_page() instead of open-coding =
it=20
as
> > > > > subtraction")
> > > > > c7248e221fb5 ("ext2_get_page(): saner type")
> > > > > 470e54a09898 ("ext2_put_page(): accept any pointer within the pag=
e")
> > > > > 15abcc147cf7 ("ext2_{set_link,delete_entry}(): don't bother with
> > >=20
> > > page_addr")
> > >=20
> > > > > 16a5ee2027b7 ("ext2_find_entry()/ext2_dotdot(): callers don't need
> > >=20
> > > page_addr
> > >=20
> > > > > anymore")
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
> > > >=20
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >=20

[snip]
=20
> > OK, I could finally run my tests to completion and had no crashes at al=
l.=20
I
> > ran "./check -g quick" on one "test" + three "scratch" loop devices
> > formatted
> > with "mkfs.ext2 -c". I ran three times _with_ and then three times=20
_without_
> > Al's following patches cloned from his vfs tree, #work.ext2 branch:
> >=20
> > f5b399373756 ("ext2: use offset_in_page() instead of open-coding it as
> > subtraction")
> > c7248e221fb5 ("ext2_get_page(): saner type")
> > 470e54a09898 ("ext2_put_page(): accept any pointer within the page")
> > 15abcc147cf7 ("ext2_{set_link,delete_entry}(): don't bother with=20
page_addr")
> > 16a5ee2027b7 ("ext2_find_entry()/ext2_dotdot(): callers don't need
> >=20
> > All the six tests were no longer killed by the Kernel :-)
> >=20
> > I got 144 failures on 597 tests, regardless of the above listed patches.
> >=20
> > My final conclusion is that these patches don't introduce regressions. =
I=20
see
> > several tests that produce memory leaks but, I want to stress it again,=
=20
the
> > failing tests are always the same with and without the patches.
> >=20
> > therefore, I think that now I can safely add my tag to all five patches
> > listed above...
> >=20
> > Tested-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
>=20
> Thanks for the effort! Al, will you submit these patches or should I just
> pull your branch into my tree?
>=20
> 							=09
Honza
> --
> Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
> SUSE Labs, CR

Thanks,

=46abio