linux-ext4 - Re: ext4 extent status tree LRU locking

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]

Message-ID: <20130618025133.GB24479@thunk.org>
Date:	Mon, 17 Jun 2013 22:51:34 -0400
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Jan kara <jack@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: ext4 extent status tree LRU locking

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:25:48AM +0800, Zheng Liu wrote:
> Ah, sorry, I forgot to mention that this patch bases against ext4/master
> branch.  Now ext4/dev branch has some regression when I run xfstests.

What regressions are you seeing?

> Ted, I notice that now in ext4 tree we have 'dev', 'dev-with-revert',
> and 'dev2' branches.  Which one is the best to generate a new patch for
> the next merge window?

Either the dev branch or the master branch.   

The dev-with-revert and dev2 were branches that I had created when
investigating a potential regression with the invalidage page range
patch set.  I've since determined that it's a timing issue and it's
not a new regression --- we've had xfstests failures with test
generic/300 for a while now.

					- 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