Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-xfs); Mon, 05 Sep 2005 12:13:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org (pentafluge.infradead.org [213.146.154.40]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id j85JD4iL018502 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2005 12:13:05 -0700 Received: from hch by pentafluge.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.52 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ECMMR-0005sI-VW for linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com; Mon, 05 Sep 2005 20:10:32 +0100 Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 20:10:31 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: Where/how to submit for review patch for shrink support? Message-ID: <20050905191031.GB18315@infradead.org> References: <20050905185221.GA5209@saytrin.hq.k1024.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050905185221.GA5209@saytrin.hq.k1024.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html X-archive-position: 6067 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: linux-xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: hch@infradead.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-xfs Content-Length: 960 Lines: 22 On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 09:52:21PM +0300, Iustin Pop wrote: > Hello to all, > > I would like to know in what form should I submit my patch and where > (probably to the list). The diff I have was made against 2.6.12.5 and > applies/compiles cleanly against 2.6.13 also. Please try to rediff it against the CVS tree at oss.sgi.com (there's not much differences, it's just the development tree), and then submit it to the list. > Now the patch does not include memory management stuff (except for a > simple resizing of mp->m_perag if we chop an entire a.g.), since I > didn't understand this issue. Also I'm not sure what can happen in some > inodes or data is in the cache but not flushed, or if this can even > happen when using transactions. Since xfs_growfs_data_private didn't > contain any such stuff, I presumed shrink doesn't also. Probably wrong > assumption... Yeah, that sounds a little fishy. I'll take a look at the patch once you'll post it.