linux-ext4 - Re: The state of ext4 tree merging (was Re: Linux 6.3-rc1)

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: <20230306124134.hmeuvjhihs4ubpmz@quack3>
Date:   Mon, 6 Mar 2023 13:41:34 +0100
From:   Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:     Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        ext4 Development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: The state of ext4 tree merging (was Re: Linux 6.3-rc1)

On Mon 06-03-23 10:17:56, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2023 at 03:24:41PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > In fact, it was quite nice in a couple of ways: not only didn't I have
> > a hugely compressed merge window where I felt I had to cram as much as
> > possible into the first few days, but the fact that we _have_ had a
> > couple of merge windows where I really asked for people to have
> > everything ready when the merge window opened seems to have set a
> > pattern: the bulk of everything really did come in early.
> > 
> 
> Not so for me watching updates to ext4 merging hell...
> 
> In this merge window, Ted only submitted the first part of ext4 updates
> [1] as noted in the resolution message [2]. The second part didn't make
> through the merge window (PR not sent). As such, the data=writepage
> cleanups have to wait for 6.4 merge window, and it is IMO inconvenient
> for linux-next to contain ext4 tree from next-20230217 for about
> seven weeks, as any enhancements and fixes applied to the tree are
> holding back from testing in linux-next until this hell can be sorted
> out.
> 
> In the long term, I'd like to see a co-maintainer step in to help
> maintaining the tree in case Ted is busy. Of couse I'm not eligible
> for that role (I played as documentation janitor instead), but
> any developer with deep knowledge and experience for the fs and its
> internals should fit the role.

To be fair, the data=journal cleanups got held back only partially due to
the merge issues. Another problem is that they somehow make problems with
filesystem freezing in data=journal mode more frequent and we wanted to
understand (and hopefully fix) that. Of course if Ted could look into this
earlier or I could earlier debug these issues, we could have merged the
cleanups but that's always the case that you have to prioritize and these
cleanups don't have that high priority...

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR