xfs: fixes for 3.15-rc5

GIT PULL Dave Chinner 2 participants 3 messages May 8, 2014 – May 9, 2014

Share & tools

Dave Chinner

author

2014-05-08 21:12 UTC #0 lore raw

Hi Linus,

Can you please pull the updates listed below? The main fix is adding support for default ACLs on O_TMPFILE opened inodes to bring XFS into line with other filesystems. Metadata CRCs are now also considered well enough tested to be fully supported, so we're removing the shouty warnings issued at mount time for filesystems with that format. And there's transaction block reservation overrun fix.

BTW, will GPG signing these pull requests cause you problems? I've been signing everything "official" I send as the XFS maintainer (e.g. notifications of tree updates) and I figured that pull requests are about as "official" as it gets. The tag is signed, so I'm not particularly worried either way...

-Dave.

The following changes since commit 330033d697ed8d296fa52b5303db9d802ad901cc:

xfs: fix tmpfile/selinux deadlock and initialize security (2014-04-17 08:15:30 +1000)

are available in the git repository at:

git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/xfs.git xfs-fixes-for-3.15-rc5

for you to fetch changes up to 8275cdd0e7ac550dcce2b3ef6d2fb3b808c1ae59:

xfs: remote attribute overwrite causes transaction overrun (2014-05-06 07:37:31 +1000)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Fixes for 3.15-rc5:
- fix a remote attribute size calculation bug that leads to a transaction overrun
- add default ACLs to O_TMPFILE files
- Remove the EXPERIMENTAL tag from filesystems with metadata CRC support

----------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Foster (1):

      xfs: initialize default acls for ->tmpfile()

Dave Chinner (2):
xfs: fully support v5 format filesystems
xfs: remote attribute overwrite causes transaction overrun

 fs/xfs/xfs_attr.c        |   24 +++++++++++++++++++-
 fs/xfs/xfs_attr_leaf.c   |   21 +++++++++---------
 fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c   |    1 +
 fs/xfs/xfs_attr_remote.c |    8 ++++---
 fs/xfs/xfs_da_btree.h    |    2 ++
 fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c        |   55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
 fs/xfs/xfs_log.c         |   10 +++++----
 fs/xfs/xfs_mount.c       |    2 --
 fs/xfs/xfs_sb.c          |    4 ----
 9 files changed, 77 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)

Signature · 2 lines

Dave Chinner
[email protected]

Linus Torvalds

2014-05-08 23:13 UTC #1 lore raw

Quoted 2 lines · Dave Chinner

BTW, will GPG signing these pull requests cause you problems?

Nope. But I won't be checking email signatures. GPG email signing is so badly done that afaik only one or two email clients support it.

Quoted 5 lines

I've
been signing everything "official" I send as the XFS maintainer (e.g. notifications of tree updates) and I figured that pull requests are about as "official" as it gets. The tag is signed, so I'm not particularly worried either way...

.. what tag? You point me at

Quoted 1 line

git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/xfs.git xfs-fixes-for-3.15-rc5

and that is definitely not a tag.

Did you *mean* to point me at refs/tags/xfs-for-linus-3.15-rc5, perhaps?

I've not pulled due to the ambiguity of the pull request.

Linus

Dave Chinner

author

2014-05-09 00:47 UTC #2 lore raw

Quoted 13 lines · Linus Torvalds

Quoted 2 lines · Dave Chinner
BTW, will GPG signing these pull requests cause you problems?
Nope. But I won't be checking email signatures. GPG email signing is so badly done that afaik only one or two email clients support it.
Quoted 5 lines
I've
been signing everything "official" I send as the XFS maintainer (e.g. notifications of tree updates) and I figured that pull requests are about as "official" as it gets. The tag is signed, so I'm not particularly worried either way...