[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130224001447.GB1196@thunk.org>
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 19:14:47 -0500
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@...il.com>
Cc: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ext4 xfstest regression due to ext4_es_lookup_extent
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 06:00:35PM +0800, Zheng Liu wrote:
> > Actually I think that the regression in 269'th you have found recently
> > caused by similar issue and commit which you foud by bisecting ( the one
> > which allow migration between indirect<->extent based inodes)
> > simply helps to spot real issue in es_caching code.
>
> I will revise this patch. IIRC, we forgot to update status tree after
> an inode is migrated from extent-based to indirect-based. Thanks for
> pointing out.
Can you do this as a new commit? I've already bumped the master
pointer up since I finished running xfstests and I'm seeing no
regressions (at least with my set of xfstests). So given that
everything has been tested and things looks pretty stable, I pushed up
the master branch.
I did remember that you were still working on this regression, but
since we're already half-way through the merge window, I really want
to make things are ready for a merge request to Linus. (Which I
probably will be sending to Linus by Monday or Tuesday.)
I do plan to collect bug fixes and any remaining regression fixes to
push to Linus by -rc2 or -rc3, so if don't rush fixing up defrag
functionality.
Thanks!!
- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists