xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes is incorrect

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS: accounting of reclaimable inodes is incorrect
From: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG <s.priebe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 15:48:38 +0200
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20110607133429.GA9049@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4DEE0EA4.9090002@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110607115441.GA4653@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4DEE2078.3010102@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110607133429.GA9049@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Thunderbird/3.1.10
Am 07.06.2011 15:34, schrieb Christoph Hellwig:
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 02:58:32PM +0200, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
Linux 2.6.32 isn't really something supported by us.  It's not just a
very old codebase, but also one where a lot of the XFS code was pretty
much in flux.  If you want supported old releases work use one of
the commercially supported one like RedHat or SuSE.
OK so my thought was totally wrong. I thought the longterm stable releases will still get bugfixed by SGI or whoever wrote the stuff. Sorry for that then. But what is then the idea of a longterm stable?

Redhat seems to have fixed it on it's own:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642680

I suspect the upstream commit you want is
081003fff467ea0e727f66d5d435b4f473a789b3, but I can't gurantee this
actually applies to the 2.6.32 codebase.
No it doesn't. I already tried to implement it into current 2.6.32.41 code.

Greets Stefan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>