Date:	Fri, 18 Oct 2013 15:13:57 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
To:	"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
cc:	tytso@....edu, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/25] e2fsprogs patchbomb 10/2013

On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Darrick J. Wong wrote:

> Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 21:48:54 -0700
> From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
> To: tytso@....edu, darrick.wong@...cle.com
> Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: [PATCH v2 00/25] e2fsprogs patchbomb 10/2013

I was going to review this, but could you please include the
information what changed since the last version of each patch (into
the patch itself) since it'll make the review much easier.

Thanks!
-Lukas

> 
> Well, here we go again.  This is the same patchbomb from a couple of
> weeks ago, minus the patches that Ted has already accepted, plus
> several fixes to resize2fs that weren't ready back then, and a few
> other fixes that migrated into the other patches.  This series is
> against -next.
> 
> Ted, since you've accepted patches into -pu, do you want me to send
> patches against -pu as well?  Or put more bluntly, what are your
> thoughts about revert-and-replace of patches in -pu?  Patches 2, 6,
> 11, 23, and 24 have changed significantly since 9/30.
> 
> The first eight patches fix miscellaneous errors: #1 stops dirent
> iteration after we successfully link an inode into a directory.  #2
> fixes a bug that prohibited us from specifyinng a 64bit superblock
> number when opening an FS.  #3 prohibits running mke2fs with -E
> resize= and meta_bg.  #4 causes users of the badblocks code to reject
> 64bit block numbers.  #5 fixes shift overflows errors when punching
> the end of non-extent files.  #6 refactors all the tests for whether
> or not we need to set the LARGE_FILE feature (because someone goofed
> earlier).  #7 fixes a problem wherein mkfs ignored non-4096 blocksize
> directives in the config file on a device larger than 2^32KB.  #8
> cleans up some code in debugfs.
> 
> The next two patches fix some 64bit truncation bugs.
> 
> Regarding next five patches, I turned on bigalloc and found a number
> of bugs relating to the fact that block_alloc_stats2() takes a block
> number but operates on clusters.  I've fixed up all the allocation
> errors that I found.  I also decided to make the quota code use
> ext2fs_punch rather than try to correct its behavior wrt bigalloc.
> There was also a bug wherein the requirement that 64-bit bitmaps be
> enabled (via EXT2_FLAG_64BITS) for bigalloc filesystems.  There's also
> a patch to reduce the e2fsck output verbosity when there are block
> bitmap errors.  Note that #11 has been refactored significantly.
> 
> The next patch provides the ability to toggle the 64bit feature on any
> ext4 filesystem.
> 
> The four patches after that fix various resize2fs bugs with bigalloc.
> 
> The next two patches fix bugs with metadata_csum.  There's a patch to
> fix up some code to test if checksums are enabled instead of a
> GDT_CSUM open-code.  Finally, there's a patch to resize2fs to rewrite
> checksums of inodes that were relocated.
> 
> The next two patches add the ability to edit extended attributes and
> add a fuse2fs driver for e2fsprogs.  I admit that the xattr editing
> functions clash with the inline_data patches, though sadly, the inline
> data patches don't provide an API to access EAs in a separate EA
> block.  The fuse driver should work with the latest versions of Linux
> fuse (2.9.2) and osxfuse (2.6.1).  I've been using the fuse driver to
> test e2fsprogs functionality, which is how I came across most of the
> bugs fixed above.  Both of these patches (#23 and #24) have received
> fixes since the 9/30 posting.
> 
> The final patch adds my metadata checksum test program to the tests/
> directory, along with a new metadata_check target to run a quick
> check.  It includes substitute mount/umount commands for use with
> fuse2fs.
> 
> For fuse2fs, I think it'd be useful to reintroduce journal replay too.
> (Or cheat and call e2fsck -E journal_only...)  Also, fuse2fs doesn't
> yet know how to read or write ACLs yet.
> 
> I've tested these e2fsprogs changes against the -next branch as of a
> few days ago.  These days, I use a 2GB ramdisk and a 20T "disk" I
> constructed out of dm-snapshot to test in an x64 VM.
> 
> Comments and questions are, as always, welcome.
> 
> --D
> --
> 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
> 
--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists