From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756820AbYGJJSy (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2008 05:18:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752653AbYGJJSq (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2008 05:18:46 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:33521 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751648AbYGJJSp (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2008 05:18:45 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 02:13:04 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Jan Kara Cc: LKML , stable@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] quota: Fix possible infinite loop in quota code Message-Id: <20080710021304.e5409793.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080710090553.GA21047@duck.suse.cz> References: <12156246412443-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> <20080709151254.9a36bdd8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080710090553.GA21047@duck.suse.cz> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.7 (GTK+ 2.12.1; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:05:53 +0200 Jan Kara wrote: > On Wed 09-07-08 15:12:54, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 19:30:41 +0200 Jan Kara wrote: > > > > > When quota structure is going to be dropped and it is dirty, quota code > > > tries to write it. If the write fails for some reason (e. g. transaction > > > cannot be started because the journal is aborted), we try writing again > > > and again and again... Fix the problem by clearing the dirty bit even if > > > the write failed. > > > > What do you consider the priority is here? Needed in 2.6.26? Backport to > > 2.6.25.x? Merge into 2.6.27 with a backport to 2.6.26.x and 2.6.25.x? > > > > Lots of options ;) > Since nobody has really seen it in the wild, I don't think it's urgent. > The bug has been there for 5 years or so without notice... I'd just let it > be included in 2.6.26.x maybe 2.6.25.x and push into 2.6.27. > So noted, thanks.