linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Btrfs updates for 6.11

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: <20240718133701.GG8022@twin.jikos.cz>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 15:37:02 +0200
From: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Btrfs updates for 6.11

On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 01:21:17PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 at 11:12, David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com> wrote:
> >
> > There's a merge conflict caused by the latency fixes from last week in
> > extent_map.c:btrfs_scan_inode(), related commits 4e660ca3a98d931809734
> > and b3ebb9b7e92a928344a. Resolved in branch for-6.11-merged and that's
> > been in linux-next for a few days.
> 
> Oh, and I notice that my resolution is slightly different, but looks
> like the actual code is equivalent.
> 
> I kept the "q" logic that had been introduced by commit 4e660ca3a98d
> ("btrfs: use a regular rb_root instead of cached rb_root for
> extent_map_tree").
> 
> I don't know how you prefer the code, but it kept the two "while
> (node)" loops in that file looking similar.

That is fine, keeping the same style makes sense.

> Of course, they were very different in other respects (ie
> drop_all_extent_maps_fast() does all extents unconditionally with that
> retry logic, while btrfs_scan_inode() has that whole "bail out on any
> contention" model, so whatever.
> 
> Anyway, it all *looks* ok to me, but please go and double-check that I
> didn't mess something up.

Looks correct to me as well.