[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201214203608.GJ575698@mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 15:36:08 -0500
From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in ext4_fill_super
(Dropping off-topic lists)
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 03:37:37PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > It's going to make everyone else's tags who pull from ext4.git messy,
> > though, with gobs of tags that probably won't be of use to them. It
> > does avoid the need to use git fetch --tags --force, and I guess
> > people are used to the need to GC tags with the linux-repo.
(I had meant to say linux-next repo above.)
> syzbot is now prepared and won't fail next time, nor on other similar
> trees. Which is good.
> So it's really up to you.
I'm curious --- are you having to do anything special in terms of
deleting old tags to keep the size of the repo under control? Git
will keep a tag around indefinitely, so if you have huge numbers of
next-YYYYMMDD tags in your repo, the size will grow without bound.
Are you doing anything to automatically garbage collect tags to preven
this from being a problem?
(I am not pulling linux-next every day; only when I need to debug a
bug reported against the -next tree, so I just manually delete the
tags as necessary. So I'm curious what folks who are following
linux-next are doing, and whether they have something specific for
linux-next tags, or whether they have a more general solution.)
Cheers,
- Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists