On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 11:04:37AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
>
> BTW, what did you use to trigger the error for you? The ext4 path where the
> assertion triggered for Linus is definitely correct so the assertion
> failure was a false positive.
I've managed to trigger it twice in about 5 or 6 full ru
On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 8:46 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>
>> A very large number of cleanups and bug fixes --- in particular for
>> the ext4 encryption patches, which is a new feature added in the last
>> merge window. Also fix a number of
On Sat 27-06-15 10:07:43, Ted Tso wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 12:02:37AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> >
> > I would tend to agree. The weird thing though is that I haven't seen
> > this problem myself, despite running multiple regression tests before
> > I sent the pull request, as well as
On Sat 27-06-15 10:07:43, Ted Tso wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 12:02:37AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> >
> > I would tend to agree. The weird thing though is that I haven't seen
> > this problem myself, despite running multiple regression tests before
> > I sent the pull request, as well as
On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 12:02:37AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>
> I would tend to agree. The weird thing though is that I haven't seen
> this problem myself, despite running multiple regression tests before
> I sent the pull request, as well as running it on my laptop and doing
> kernel compiles
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 08:05:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 8:46 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> >
> > A very large number of cleanups and bug fixes --- in particular for
> > the ext4 encryption patches, which is a new feature added in the last
> > merge window. Also fix
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 8:46 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>
> A very large number of cleanups and bug fixes --- in particular for
> the ext4 encryption patches, which is a new feature added in the last
> merge window. Also fix a number of long-standing xfstest failures.
> (Quota writes failing due to
[ I renamed "ext4_follow_link()" to "ext4_encrypted_follow_link()" in
the merge resolution, to make it clear that that function is _only_
used for encrypted symlinks. The function doesn't actually work for
non-encrypted symlinks at all, and they use the generic helpers
On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 23:46:26 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> ext4: set lazytime on remount if MS_LAZYTIME is set by mount
I was wondering what had happened to this bug and was about to ask, just as I
saw this. It applies cleanly to 4.1 and does the trick - just tested with
util-linux-2.16.2. My /
Hi Linus,
Here's my suggested merge resolution to deal with Al Viro's symlink changes.
- Ted
diff --cc fs/ext4/symlink.c
index ba5bd18,68e915a..000
--- a/fs/ext4/symlink.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/symlink.c
@@@ -35,19 -34,20 +34,17 @@@ static const char *ext
The following changes since commit e26081808edadfd257c6c9d81014e3b25e9a6118:
Linux 4.1-rc4 (2015-05-18 10:13:47 -0700)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4.git
tags/ext4_for_linus
for you to fetch changes up to a2fd66d069d86d793e9
11 matches
Mail list logo
