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=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS 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 C0F26C282CC for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 06:44:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9075A2145D for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 06:44:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="jXuqdUSa" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727067AbfBEGo6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2019 01:44:58 -0500 Received: from mail-yw1-f68.google.com ([209.85.161.68]:47086 "EHLO mail-yw1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726956AbfBEGo5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2019 01:44:57 -0500 Received: by mail-yw1-f68.google.com with SMTP id n12so1256088ywn.13; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 22:44:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=d2nBE7A7AjmpBY2jZvIJckR30FaXWP8JiQGDjXdrUjM=; b=jXuqdUSamuqyRDf1y7wcOeKdqCvofSdnKZZ492+K8pr9ZPo2AxJN/yAiBN0aGKoSoI ModKRU25Yi2ssNel59t0Vf3juq3zBzUtEqhkAM1biO3Nx1T6ZOrQGbUiW9sXHWZMyZ3B ju3KqGSZr5NlI9jenyVMfk28EZfr8P9/uMsVlusPmwPFiKD/KF2AmS0cUObLp21P8+Rx LO+szlRTvGgDvmlBzhZrUdtP1RBP1PlzhRWDFOjOYbIB1IltPBYGKISARVsJ/Rym4KdR Vgz2CAqNtce/FWwuADi8biC0xokftHRQbua5Uv884tRkdi5N4KLvOnj+6itzAdrQO/hC BoUA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=d2nBE7A7AjmpBY2jZvIJckR30FaXWP8JiQGDjXdrUjM=; b=cNYfIZ80+UZM4zr0m+c0AqWVMayH11HYo5WWe7IqlL9E2CwgREafWnnEvUHs2Gzz1L XlTw6C+UgRRy6R5XQpZyJydo2+Fk78+5l0gT9Kb6wN1SZINfRRRo3zm+jb6PwX1ccRFT ERPsb8kGzVs9x9vtfsUTWkxY1BbnUTUCBjljIF3jGnLRJbiAQ1EWlVTPm0eLhckNXKas I7sCKATj+3KKFmQX4dm5tb++C72d0X6zcwcv0eNiPw0FdaYptP+yaNpImYJwkY14wPT1 MZ1hddLJtkRmnDK9mKBD8BfQ6JshEk8DYzgLLzb1NUF0em/mBZhvMYZjihI7ql3ZCVhm NJyA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuYzvNq+JM1hBS1NJMDcqixEqasYimZu+z/LfOoVLyFnPiGaBG90 /Y/UMEo+z6dAHg672QQI5tx1exZkqbg9uxNgYIU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IZPQ/JUAKSxg06/pzsbotgv3US2K4irBomfz0iHfECSQ4aA6u3kfBkKIICoR3bq8UKPaehRIRXeildFnPT1bVs= X-Received: by 2002:a0d:e741:: with SMTP id q62mr2615866ywe.34.1549349096459; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 22:44:56 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190204165427.23607-1-mcgrof@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20190204165427.23607-1-mcgrof@kernel.org> From: Amir Goldstein Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 08:44:45 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] xfs: stable fixes for v4.19.y To: Luis Chamberlain Cc: linux-xfs , Greg KH , Sasha Levin , stable , Christoph Hellwig , Brian Foster , Carlos Maiolino , Eric Sandeen , "Darrick J. Wong" , Dave Chinner Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 6:54 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > Kernel stable team, > > here is a v2 respin of my XFS stable patches for v4.19.y. The only > change in this series is adding the upstream commit to the commit log, > and I've now also Cc'd stable@vger.kernel.org as well. No other issues > were spotted or raised with this series. > > Reviews, questions, or rants are greatly appreciated. Luis, Thanks a lot for doing this work. For the sake of people not following "oscheck", could you please write a list of configurations you tested with xfstests. auto group? Any expunged tests we should know about? I went over the candidate patches and to me, they all look like stable worthy patches and I have not identified any dependencies. Original authors and reviewers are in the best position to verify those assessments, so please guys, if each one of you acks his own patch, that shouldn't take a lot of anyone's time. Specifically, repeating Luis's request from v1 cover letter - There are two patches by Dave ([6,7/10]) that are originally from a 7 patch series of assorted fixes: https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/10689445/ Please confirm that those two patches do stand on their own. Thanks, Amir. > > Luis > > Brian Foster (1): > xfs: fix shared extent data corruption due to missing cow reservation > > Carlos Maiolino (1): > xfs: Fix xqmstats offsets in /proc/fs/xfs/xqmstat > > Christoph Hellwig (1): > xfs: cancel COW blocks before swapext > > Christophe JAILLET (1): > xfs: Fix error code in 'xfs_ioc_getbmap()' > > Darrick J. Wong (1): > xfs: fix PAGE_MASK usage in xfs_free_file_space > > Dave Chinner (3): > xfs: fix overflow in xfs_attr3_leaf_verify > xfs: fix transient reference count error in > xfs_buf_resubmit_failed_buffers > xfs: delalloc -> unwritten COW fork allocation can go wrong > > Eric Sandeen (1): > xfs: fix inverted return from xfs_btree_sblock_verify_crc > > Ye Yin (1): > fs/xfs: fix f_ffree value for statfs when project quota is set > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_attr_leaf.c | 11 +++++++++-- > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_bmap.c | 5 ++++- > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_btree.c | 2 +- > fs/xfs/xfs_bmap_util.c | 10 ++++++++-- > fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++------- > fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c | 2 +- > fs/xfs/xfs_qm_bhv.c | 2 +- > fs/xfs/xfs_reflink.c | 1 + > fs/xfs/xfs_stats.c | 2 +- > 9 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.18.0 >