[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wjnL81j5WvDr_R3Rg9k9fw94RxRM0xJsQgiWUjPZimF5w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2023 15:01:14 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
"Vishal Moola (Oracle)" <vishal.moola@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mm-stable tree with the ext4 tree
On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 2:20 PM Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
>
> 3) I'll then send the ext4 dev branch (minus the data=writepage
> cleanups) as a pull request to Linus. Next week, after Jan has a
> chance to review my patch conflict resolutions, I'll send a second
> pull request with the data=writepage cleanups. (As usual, I'll do my
> full set of test runs before sending the pull request.)
>
> Linus, are you OK with this plan?
Yeah. I think the whole "do two completely different things to the
same area in parallel" was horrible, and we should strive to avoid
that kind of thing in filesystems in general.
So let's just serialize them instead of doing them at the same time
and try to merge them together.
Even if the merge is then successful, it just seems unnecessarily
risky from a "what if somebody reports a problem, and it bisects to
the merge, and then we have something subtle going on".
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists