Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 1 Jun 2023 17:27:46 +0200
From:   Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
        Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
        stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] ext4: Remove ext4 locking of moved directory
Message-ID: <20230601152746.kqykcztndxvxbbf7@quack3>
References: <20230601104525.27897-1-jack@suse.cz>
 <20230601105830.13168-1-jack@suse.cz>
 <20230601145222.GB1069561@mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230601145222.GB1069561@mit.edu>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu 01-06-23 10:52:22, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 12:58:21PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Remove locking of moved directory in ext4_rename2(). We will take care
> > of it in VFS instead. This effectively reverts commit 0813299c586b
> > ("ext4: Fix possible corruption when moving a directory") and followup
> > fixes.
> 
> Remind me --- commit 0813299c586b is not actually causing any
> problems; it's just not fully effective at solving the problem.  Is
> that correct?

Yes, correct.

> In other words, is there a rush in trying to get this revert to Linus
> during this cycle as a regression fix?
> 
> I think the answer is no, and we can just let this full patch series
> go in via the vfs branch during the next merge window, but I just
> wanted to make sure.

Exactly, that's my plan as well.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR