Message ID | cover.1622728563.git.dsterba@suse.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | [GIT,PULL] Btrfs fixes for 5.13-rc5 | expand |
The pull request you sent on Thu, 3 Jun 2021 16:50:15 +0200:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kdave/linux.git for-5.13-rc4-tag
has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/fd2ff2774e90a0ba58f1158d7ea095af51f31644
Thank you!
On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 04:50:15PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > Hi, > > this is a batch from last week, I wanted to give it more testing because > last pull request introduced a bug, interacting zoned and subpage > features. Otherwise there are error handling improvements and bug > fixes. The last commit is from today, adding IRC link to maintainers > file. > > Please pull, thanks. > > - error handling improvements, caught by error injection > - handle errors during checksum deletion > - set error on mapping when ordered extent io cannot be finished > - inode link count fixup in tree-log > - missing return value checks for inode updates in tree-log > - abort transaction in rename exchange if adding second reference fails > > - fixes > - fix fsync failure after writes to prealloc extents > - fix deadlock when cloning inline extents and low on available space > - fix compressed writes that cross stripe boundary > David, Could you also add commit "btrfs: zoned: fix zone number to sector/physical calculation" for pull? Without this commit, on a device larger than 4 TB, zoned btrfs will overwrite the primary superblock with the 2nd copy and causes a mount failure after the first mount/umount. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/20210527062732.2683788-1-naohiro.aota@wdc.com/ Thanks,
On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 10:17:07AM +0900, Naohiro Aota wrote: > Could you also add commit "btrfs: zoned: fix zone number to > sector/physical calculation" for pull? Without this commit, on a > device larger than 4 TB, zoned btrfs will overwrite the primary > superblock with the 2nd copy and causes a mount failure after the > first mount/umount. Yeah, a few more fixes plus that one are in queue for the next pull.