On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 08:32:40AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
I couldn't work out what set of commits I needed to revert to get
clean revert, so I just reverted the commits and hacked out the
revert failures to what looked ok. Feel free to send me a clean set
of reverts, and I'll replace these patches with them... :)
Will do. I will queue the reverts in my external tree & ask Linus to pull
them into v4.3 so we don't ship with deadlocks.
> Also, if I understood your previous mails correctly you were
> first two revert patches for v4.3 so we get back to v4.2 level locking, and
> the rest of the series will target v4.4, correct? How does this work? Do the
> patches need to be split into two series and tested separately?
Test it and push the reverts however you like. I don't care how the
reverts get to 4.3 - I'll be carrying them locally in my trees from
now and so my development and testing is now unaffected by the bugs
that are in the 4.3 code. If you aren't going to push them for 4.3
then I'd suggest that they go to linus along with the rest of the
XFS changes in this series.
FWIW, I'm quite happy to host all the pending DAX changes in a
public git tree and ask for it to be included in linux-next. It's
probably a good idea to do this because it makes it much easier to
co-ordinate merges when we are touching multiple subsystems (ext4,
xfs, dax, mm, etc). And it will help prevent the "patches molder on
the list until Andrew hoovers them up" problem and so prevent this
situation from happening in the future...
No objections from me. :) I agree that it would be nice to have a central
home for all the DAX patches.