All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com>
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ext4: fix possible use-after-free ext4_remove_li_request()
Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 12:03:13 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110520160313.GA29282@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1105201122510.5226@dhcp-27-109.brq.redhat.com>

Lukas, are you going to be providing a new version of these patch
series or not?  

If you are, could you do it as a separate patch series, instead of
only updating one patch as a reply to the mail thread.  When people do
this, I find it painful since I need to figure out, "ok, I need v2 of
the 1/4 patch, v3 of the 2/4 patch, v4 of the 3/4 patch, and v3 of of
the 4/4 patch.  To provide context, please add version descriptors
after the --- of the patch.  (i.e, "v3 --> v4; fixed commit message")

Also, if we're going to be doing extended review of patches like this,
instead of my just fixing things up when I pull stuff in, people need
to start authoring patches ***much*** sooner.  Doing multiple publish
and review cycles now that the merge window is open really doesn't
work.  One way of solving this in the future is to simply not take any
patch that is first submitted after say, -rc5 or -rc6 until the next
merge window.  But given that some patches didn't *start* getting much
review until 2-3 weeks ago, that wouldn't be entirely fair.

But for the next merge window, if this is going to work, we need
people submitting patches earlier, and people reviewing patches
earlier.

Thanks,

						- Ted

  reply	other threads:[~2011-05-20 16:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-09 15:57 [PATCH 1/4 v2] ext4: Use schedule_timeout_interruptible() for waiting in lazyinit thread Lukas Czerner
2011-05-09 15:57 ` [PATCH 2/4 v2] ext4: Remove unnecessary wait_event ext4_run_lazyinit_thread() Lukas Czerner
2011-05-19 19:37   ` Eric Sandeen
2011-05-20  9:09     ` Lukas Czerner
2011-05-09 15:57 ` [PATCH 3/4] ext4: fix init_itable=n to work as expected for n=0 Lukas Czerner
2011-05-19 19:59   ` Eric Sandeen
2011-05-20  9:21     ` Lukas Czerner
2011-05-09 15:57 ` [PATCH 4/4] ext4: fix possible use-after-free ext4_remove_li_request() Lukas Czerner
2011-05-19 20:05   ` Eric Sandeen
2011-05-20  9:27     ` Lukas Czerner
2011-05-20 16:03       ` Ted Ts'o [this message]
2011-05-20 16:12         ` Eric Sandeen
2011-05-20 17:47           ` Ted Ts'o
2011-05-20 17:49             ` Eric Sandeen
2011-05-20 16:16         ` Lukas Czerner
2011-05-20 17:39           ` Ted Ts'o
2011-05-20 17:42             ` Ted Ts'o
2011-05-19 19:30 ` [PATCH 1/4 v2] ext4: Use schedule_timeout_interruptible() for waiting in lazyinit thread Eric Sandeen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20110520160313.GA29282@thunk.org \
    --to=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=lczerner@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.