linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/8 v2] ext4: initialize extent status tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 28 Sep 2012 13:42:33 -0400
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Yongqiang Yang <xiaoqiangnk@...il.com>,
	Allison Henderson <achender@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@...bao.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/8 v2] ext4: initialize extent status tree

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 03:27:14PM +0800, Zheng Liu wrote:
> 
> Until now, I have fixed the bigalloc bug that is reported by xfstest
> #230, and merged Hugh's patch.  But I do really think that this patch
> set couldn't be applied at this merge window because the change is not
> *minor*, and it still needs to do more tests.  That would be great if
> you can keep this patch set in dev branch at this merge window.  Thanks!

The dev branch is the set of patches that are planned to go to Linus
during the next merge window, so if we drop it from the merge window,
I would drop it from the dev branch and put it in the "unstable"
portion of the patch series.

It would be a shame to drop it since this provides the SEEK_HOLE
capability, though.  Can you say more about which change is not minor?
The change to fix the bigalloc bug?   Or the whole patch series?

					- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html