linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] ext4: replace ext4_es_insert

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: <940f2001-ded4-4ecf-b1f0-a424b2983167@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2025 12:44:24 +0800
From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@...weicloud.com>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, jack@...e.cz,
 yi.zhang@...wei.com, yizhang089@...il.com, libaokun1@...wei.com,
 yangerkun@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] ext4: replace ext4_es_insert_extent() when
 caching on-disk extents

On 11/29/2025 11:52 AM, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2025 at 09:32:25AM +0800, Zhang Yi wrote:
>>
>> The ext4.git tree[1] shows that only the first three patches from this
>> v2 version have been merged, possibly because the fourth patch conflicted
>> with ErKun's patch[2].
> 
> Yeah, oops.  Sorry about that.  I think I had checked some other
> branch via a git reset --hard, and forgot that I had accidentally
> aborted the git am after the patch conflict.
> 
> I've rearranged the dev brach so that those first three patches are
> not at the tip of the dev branch.  So if you want to grab the dev
> branch, and then rebase your new series on top of commit 91ef18b567da,
> you can do that.
> 
> * 1e366d088866 - (HEAD -> dev, ext4/dev) ext4: don't zero the entire extent if EXT4_EXT_DATA_PARTIAL_VALID1 (10 minutes ago)
> * 6afae3414127 - ext4: subdivide EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID1 (10 minutes ago)
> * a4e2cc74a11b - ext4: cleanup zeroout in ext4_split_extent_at() (10 minutes ago)
> * 91ef18b567da - ext4: mark inodes without acls in __ext4_iget() (10 minutes ago)
> 
> Note that the merge window opens on this coming Sunday, but a good
> number of these patches are bug fixes (and not in the sense of adding
> a new feature :-), so I'd prefer to land them this cycle if possible.
> 
>> I've written a new version locally, adding two fix
>> patches for the three merged patches, and then rebase the subsequent
>> patches and modify them directly. I can send them out after texting.
>> Is this okay?
> 
> Why don't you modify your series so it applies on top of 91ef18b567da,
> so we don't hace to have the fixup patches, and I may just simply push
> everything up to 91ef18b567da to Linus, and we can then just apply the
> next version of your series on top of that commit, and I'll push it to
> Linus right after -rc1.
> 
> Does that seem workable to you?
> 
> 							- Ted

Sure, I will rebase my series on top of 91ef18b567da and send out today.

Cheers,
Yi.