Re: [PATCHSETS] v14 fsdax-rmap + v11 fsdax-reflink

From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
	Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-xfs <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux NVDIMM <nvdimm@lists.linux.dev>,
	Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Jane Chu <jane.chu@oracle.com>,
	Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@suse.de>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com>,
	linmiaohe@huawei.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHSETS] v14 fsdax-rmap + v11 fsdax-reflink
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 18:55:50 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4h0a3aT3XH9qCBW3nbT4K3EwQvBSD_oX5W=55_x24-wFA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220511014818.GE1098723@dread.disaster.area>

[ add Andrew ]

On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 6:49 PM Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 05:03:52PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Sun, May 08, 2022 at 10:36:06PM +0800, Shiyang Ruan wrote:
> > > This is a combination of two patchsets:
> > >  1.fsdax-rmap: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20220419045045.1664996-1-ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com/
> > >  2.fsdax-reflink: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20210928062311.4012070-1-ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com/
> > >
> > >  Changes since v13 of fsdax-rmap:
> > >   1. Fixed mistakes during rebasing code to latest next-
> > >   2. Rebased to next-20220504
> > >
> > >  Changes since v10 of fsdax-reflink:
> > >   1. Rebased to next-20220504 and fsdax-rmap
> > >   2. Dropped a needless cleanup patch: 'fsdax: Convert dax_iomap_zero to
> > >       iter model'
> > >   3. Fixed many conflicts during rebasing
> > >   4. Fixed a dedupe bug in Patch 05: the actuall length to compare could be
> > >       shorter than smap->length or dmap->length.
> > >   PS: There are many changes during rebasing.  I think it's better to
> > >       review again.
> > >
> > > ==
> > > Shiyang Ruan (14):
> > >   fsdax-rmap:
> > >     dax: Introduce holder for dax_device
> > >     mm: factor helpers for memory_failure_dev_pagemap
> > >     pagemap,pmem: Introduce ->memory_failure()
> > >     fsdax: Introduce dax_lock_mapping_entry()
> > >     mm: Introduce mf_dax_kill_procs() for fsdax case
> >
> > Hmm.  This patchset touches at least the dax, pagecache, and xfs
> > subsystems.  Assuming it's too late for 5.19, how should we stage this
> > for 5.20?
>
> Yeah, it's past my "last date for this merge cycle" which was
> -rc6. I expected stuff might slip a little - as it has with the LARP
> code - but I don't have the time and bandwidth to start working
> on merging another feature from scratch before the merge window
> comes around.
>
> Getting the dax+reflink stuff in this cycle was always an optimistic
> stretch, but I wanted to try so that there was no doubt it would be
> ready for merge in the next cycle...
>
> > I could just add the entire series to iomap-5.20-merge and base the
> > xfs-5.20-merge off of that?  But I'm not sure what else might be landing
> > in the other subsystems, so I'm open to input.
>
> It'll need to be a stable branch somewhere, but I don't think it
> really matters where al long as it's merged into the xfs for-next
> tree so it gets filesystem test coverage...

So how about let the notify_failure() bits go through -mm this cycle,
if Andrew will have it, and then the reflnk work has a clean v5.19-rc1
baseline to build from?