linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus' 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 25 Mar 2011 17:30:49 +0100
From:	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...glemail.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus' tree

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> Hello, Stephen, Ted.
>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:56:43PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Today's linux-next merge of the ext4 tree got a conflict in
>> fs/ext4/super.c between commit fd89d5f2030a ("ext4: convert to
>> alloc_workqueue()") from Linus' tree and commit 198868f35de9 ("ext4: Use
>> single thread to perform DIO unwritten convertion") from the ext4 tree.
>>
>> I just used the ext4 tree version.
>
> Both are about the same conversion but the one using alloc_workqueue()
> is better because 1. create_singlethread_workqueue() is going away and
> 2. it doesn't require strict ordering among queued works.
>
> Ted, what do you think?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> tejun
>

As my linux-next system is unstable, I had a look into my own merge
(into linux-next GIT) before ext4 stuff went to mainline.
Just wanted to test a revert to "old" code in linux-next (see below).

- Sedat -

--- a/fs/ext4/super.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/super.c
@@ -596,7 +596,7 @@ __acquires(bitlock)

        vaf.fmt = fmt;
        vaf.va = &args;
-       printk(KERN_CRIT "EXT4-fs error (device %s): %s:%d: group %u",
+       printk(KERN_CRIT "EXT4-fs error (device %s): %s:%d: group %u, ",
               sb->s_id, function, line, grp);
        if (ino)
                printk(KERN_CONT "inode %lu: ", ino);
@@ -3518,12 +3518,7 @@ static int ext4_fill_super(struct super_block
*sb, void *data, int silent)
        percpu_counter_set(&sbi->s_dirtyblocks_counter, 0);

 no_journal:
-       /*
-        * The maximum number of concurrent works can be high and
-        * concurrency isn't really necessary.  Limit it to 1.
-        */
-       EXT4_SB(sb)->dio_unwritten_wq =
-               alloc_workqueue("ext4-dio-unwritten", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, 1);
+       EXT4_SB(sb)->dio_unwritten_wq =
create_singlethread_workqueue("ext4-dio-unwritten");
        if (!EXT4_SB(sb)->dio_unwritten_wq) {
                printk(KERN_ERR "EXT4-fs: failed to create DIO workqueue\n");
                goto failed_mount_wq;
- EOT -
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/