xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: When LVM-0.9.1beta7 will be merged to XFS cvs tree?

To: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: When LVM-0.9.1beta7 will be merged to XFS cvs tree?
From: Ragnar Kjørstad <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 01:13:25 +0200
Cc: kris buggenhout <buggenkr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Fang Han <dfbb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20010705234532.A16619@gruyere.muc.suse.de>; from Andi Kleen on Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 11:45:32PM +0200
References: <20010705151357.A2773@dfbbb.cn.mvd> <3B4417D5.ECDC1125@god.bel.alcatel.be> <20010705101747.A32674@gruyere.muc.suse.de> <20010705234137.E28075@vestdata.no> <20010705234532.A16619@gruyere.muc.suse.de>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 11:45:32PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 11:41:37PM +0200, Ragnar Kjørstad wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 10:17:47AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > All block devices in a XFS kernel need a special patch to add an ioctl
> > > to set the logical block size. The original poster probably didn't add
> > > that ioctl to his new hacked in LVM; which will cause all kinds of 
> > > problems with xfs user tools and also probably file system corruption.
> > 
> > Is there a patch to add this ioctl to lvm?
> 
> Yes, just diff the XFS tree against a Linus tree.

Now I'm confused. If the fix is in the XFS tree, why is it not in the
XFS-patch? was the fix just commited? 


-- 
Ragnar Kjorstad
Big Storage

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