Re: Massive filesystem corruption since kernel 5.2 (ARCH)

["Holger Hoffstätte" <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>]

On 9/12/19 10:24 AM, James Harvey wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 3:51 AM Filipe Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> Until the fix gets merged to 5.2 kernels (and 5.3), I don't really
>> recommend running 5.2 or 5.3.
> 
> What is your recommendation for distributions that have been shipping
> 5.2.x for quite some time, where a distro-wide downgrade to 5.1.x
> isn't really an option that will be considered, especially because
> many users aren't using BTRFS?  Can/should your patch be backported to
> 5.2.13/5.2.14?  Or, does it really need to be applied to 5.3rc or git
> master?  Or, is it possibly not the right fix for the corruption risk,
> and should a flashing neon sign be given to users to just run 5.1.x
> even though the distribution repos have 5.2.x?

It applies and works just fine in 5.2.x, I have it running in .14.
If your distribution doesn't apply patches or just ships a random
release-of-the month kernel, well.. ¯\(ツ)/¯

> What is your recommendation for users who have been running 5.2.x and
> running into a lot of hangs?  Would you say to apply your patch to a
> custom-compiled kernel, or to downgrade to 5.1.x?

5.1.x is EOL upstream and you might be missing other critical things
like security fixes. Considering how easy it is to build a custom kernel
from an existing configuration, the former.

-h