From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB71A211F888F for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 12:12:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 13:12:35 -0600 From: Ross Zwisler Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] pmem: only set QUEUE_FLAG_DAX for fsdax mode Message-ID: <20180626191235.GB18273@linux.intel.com> References: <20180626175932.8899-1-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <20180626175932.8899-2-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <20180626185830.GA7171@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" To: Dan Williams Cc: Mike Snitzer , linux-nvdimm , Linux Kernel Mailing List , stable , linux-xfs , device-mapper development , linux-fsdevel List-ID: On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 12:07:40PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 26 2018 at 2:52pm -0400, > > Dan Williams wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Ross Zwisler > >> wrote: > >> > QUEUE_FLAG_DAX is an indication that a given block device supports > >> > filesystem DAX and should not be set for PMEM namespaces which are in "raw" > >> > or "sector" modes. These namespaces lack struct page and are prevented > >> > from participating in filesystem DAX. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler > >> > Suggested-by: Mike Snitzer > >> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > >> > >> Why is this cc: stable? What is the user visible impact of this change > >> especially given the requirement to validate QUEUE_FLAG_DAX with > >> bdev_dax_supported()? Patch looks good, but it's just a cosmetic fixup > >> afaics. > > > > This isn't cosmetic when you consider that stacking up a DM device is > > looking at this flag to determine whether a table does or does _not_ > > support DAX. > > > > So this patch, in conjunction with the other changes in the series, is > > certainly something I'd consider appropriate for stable. > > I think this classifies as something that never worked correctly and > is not a regression. It does not identify which commit it is repairing > or the user visible failure mode. Ah, do I need a Fixes: tag for patch 2, then? That one *does* need to go to stable, I think. _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3C60C43144 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 19:12:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92B2926F20 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 19:12:40 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 92B2926F20 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754538AbeFZTMj (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2018 15:12:39 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:45496 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752020AbeFZTMh (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2018 15:12:37 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Jun 2018 12:12:36 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.51,275,1526367600"; d="scan'208";a="52449814" Received: from theros.lm.intel.com (HELO linux.intel.com) ([10.232.112.164]) by orsmga008.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 26 Jun 2018 12:12:35 -0700 Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 13:12:35 -0600 From: Ross Zwisler To: Dan Williams Cc: Mike Snitzer , Ross Zwisler , Toshi Kani , device-mapper development , linux-nvdimm , Linux Kernel Mailing List , stable , linux-xfs , linux-fsdevel Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] pmem: only set QUEUE_FLAG_DAX for fsdax mode Message-ID: <20180626191235.GB18273@linux.intel.com> Mail-Followup-To: Ross Zwisler , Dan Williams , Mike Snitzer , Toshi Kani , device-mapper development , linux-nvdimm , Linux Kernel Mailing List , stable , linux-xfs , linux-fsdevel References: <20180626175932.8899-1-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <20180626175932.8899-2-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <20180626185830.GA7171@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 12:07:40PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 26 2018 at 2:52pm -0400, > > Dan Williams wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Ross Zwisler > >> wrote: > >> > QUEUE_FLAG_DAX is an indication that a given block device supports > >> > filesystem DAX and should not be set for PMEM namespaces which are in "raw" > >> > or "sector" modes. These namespaces lack struct page and are prevented > >> > from participating in filesystem DAX. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler > >> > Suggested-by: Mike Snitzer > >> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > >> > >> Why is this cc: stable? What is the user visible impact of this change > >> especially given the requirement to validate QUEUE_FLAG_DAX with > >> bdev_dax_supported()? Patch looks good, but it's just a cosmetic fixup > >> afaics. > > > > This isn't cosmetic when you consider that stacking up a DM device is > > looking at this flag to determine whether a table does or does _not_ > > support DAX. > > > > So this patch, in conjunction with the other changes in the series, is > > certainly something I'd consider appropriate for stable. > > I think this classifies as something that never worked correctly and > is not a regression. It does not identify which commit it is repairing > or the user visible failure mode. Ah, do I need a Fixes: tag for patch 2, then? That one *does* need to go to stable, I think. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ross Zwisler Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] pmem: only set QUEUE_FLAG_DAX for fsdax mode Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 13:12:35 -0600 Message-ID: <20180626191235.GB18273@linux.intel.com> References: <20180626175932.8899-1-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <20180626175932.8899-2-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> <20180626185830.GA7171@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces-hn68Rpc1hR1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" To: Dan Williams Cc: Mike Snitzer , linux-nvdimm , Linux Kernel Mailing List , stable , linux-xfs , device-mapper development , linux-fsdevel List-Id: dm-devel.ids On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 12:07:40PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 26 2018 at 2:52pm -0400, > > Dan Williams wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Ross Zwisler > >> wrote: > >> > QUEUE_FLAG_DAX is an indication that a given block device supports > >> > filesystem DAX and should not be set for PMEM namespaces which are in "raw" > >> > or "sector" modes. These namespaces lack struct page and are prevented > >> > from participating in filesystem DAX. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler > >> > Suggested-by: Mike Snitzer > >> > Cc: stable-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > >> > >> Why is this cc: stable? What is the user visible impact of this change > >> especially given the requirement to validate QUEUE_FLAG_DAX with > >> bdev_dax_supported()? Patch looks good, but it's just a cosmetic fixup > >> afaics. > > > > This isn't cosmetic when you consider that stacking up a DM device is > > looking at this flag to determine whether a table does or does _not_ > > support DAX. > > > > So this patch, in conjunction with the other changes in the series, is > > certainly something I'd consider appropriate for stable. > > I think this classifies as something that never worked correctly and > is not a regression. It does not identify which commit it is repairing > or the user visible failure mode. Ah, do I need a Fixes: tag for patch 2, then? That one *does* need to go to stable, I think.