From: Xiang Wang Subject: Re: fsck errors encountered when applying patch "ext4: fix BUG when calling ext4_error with locked block group" Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:33:49 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20090221012908.GC12966@mini-me.lan> <532480950902201737j5162125teea57eedbd01873f@mail.gmail.com> <20090221015026.GD12966@mini-me.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Michael Rubin , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Curt Wohlgemuth , Chad Talbott , Frank Mayhar To: Theodore Tso Return-path: Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:9202 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751684AbZBYSd4 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 13:33:56 -0500 Received: from zps36.corp.google.com (zps36.corp.google.com [172.25.146.36]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id n1PIXpnn019161 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:33:52 GMT Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (wff28.prod.google.com [10.142.6.28]) by zps36.corp.google.com with ESMTP id n1PIXnFH030911 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:33:49 -0800 Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 28so151286wff.29 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:33:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20090221015026.GD12966@mini-me.lan> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hey Ted, Good news! You are right! Taking the two commits as you suggested cleared our bug. Thank you very much for pointing that out. We may still be back-porting patches for a while until our internal tree catches up with 2.6.29 or 2.6.30. But we definitely will be much more careful in taking patches. Thanks, Xiang On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 05:37:35PM -0800, Michael Rubin wrote: >> We know. Our qualifying process is not the most light weight and the >> kernel moves fast. Normally we take a snapshot and qualify it, tryin= g >> to take upstream patches when we can and then also publishing bugs w= e >> find. The problem is that with ext4 still undergoing active dev we >> want to be able to keep our ext4 portion of the tree as up to date a= s >> possible. > > I understand, and it's not a burden to answer questions like this. =A0= I > was just pointing out the effort that it will likely take to backport > the percpu counter patches, since you will need to scan the your > sources and make sure the behavioural changes in percpu_counter_sum > isn't going to cause problems for you elsewhere, and that this sort o= f > thing is probably going to get harder as time goes by, not easier. =A0= I > know how painful it can be, since I've been having a hard time > backporting fixes to the 2.6.27 stable tree. > > The good news is that ext4 development is settling down, so if you > manage to take another snapshot around 2.6.29 or 2.6.30, I suspect > life will be much easier (at least as far as backporting patches for > ext4 is concerned.) > > Best regards, > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0- Ted > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4"= in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at =A0http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html