[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0jKa0n+7Bg+znRuhSuaot0WG3ByAttkFdRoBgMveUff7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 19:05:33 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Yu Chen <yu.c.chen@...el.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Hendrik Woltersdorf <hendrikw@...or.de>,
Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Rui Zhang <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Yu Chen <yu.chen.surf@...il.com>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>,
Oleg Antonyan <oleg.b.antonyan@...il.com>,
Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [Regression/XFS/PM] Freeze tasks failed in xfsaild
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 12:40:43AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Wednesday, November 15, 2017 12:07:30 AM CET Dave Chinner wrote:
>> Can we stop here and be constructive going forward, please?
>
> Then let's stop this nonsense and get to work.
>
>> > > So what do you think should be done, specifically?
>> >
>> > Luis posted an initial version of those "use fs freeze" changes
>> > recently, so Work with Luis to get those changes into the kernel.
>>
>> This isn't the first version as per the above and sorry, but without
>> help from fs people this is going to end the same way as before and
>> I sort of doubt that "working with Luis" alone is going to be sufficient.
>>
>> We need the fs people to actually help us, pretty much like back in 2011.
>
> Rafael, AFAICT the only outstanding issue with the patches I posted were
> the last two patches. I haven't had time to re-test my patches without the
> last patch, but if Chinner was right, and I suspect he was, then the last patch
> is what implicated the need for the ext patch, which we don't want. So dropping
> the last two patches I think would be a good starting point.
>
> I hope to have time to re-test this week, if you feel compelled to help,
> you can also help test the patches except for the last two. Then if you
> want to help further, helping iron out the kinks on the last patch would
> be much appreciated.
OK, please resend the series when you're ready.
Thanks,
Rafael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists