Comment 61 for bug 2044657
Revision history for this message
| Mauricio Faria de Oliveira (mfo) wrote | #61 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
0e1f616
(Get the code!)
Reviewed zfs-linux on mantic/
They all look good to me (notes below, in addition to usual checks),
but I'll ask for another reviewer to provide input too, as it's ZFS.
(But I did want to provide some assistance in this long-running SRU.)
Thanks,
Mauricio
...
mantic:
The code change looks good and hasn't changed further upstream.
(There are suggested /alternatives/ in Draft state [1], but the draft reassures that the original, merged PR is correct.)
The [Test Plan] section provides both a specific reproducer and general testing (in many forms), which is reassuring for -proposed verification.
P.S.: not very polished changelog/patch files, but combined they do provide the information to find the LP bug and upstream/commit, usually found via DEP-3 headers as Origin/Bug-Ubuntu.
(Style isn't the most important thing in this case or at the moment.)
$ git log --oneline zfs-2.2.2 -- module/zfs/dnode.c | grep -m1 'dnode_is_dirty: check dnode and its data for dirtiness'
9b9b09f452a4 dnode_is_dirty: check dnode and its data for dirtiness
jammy:
Likewise.
Regarding the point release, 22.04.4 (scheduled for Feb 22 [2]),
we are still before 'Release minus 14 (or 7) days' [3]
(when '6. Coordinate with the SRU team' and '7. ... -updates pocket freeze' happen).
$ git log --oneline zfs-2.1.14 -- module/zfs/dnode.c | grep -m1 'dnode_is_dirty: check dnode and its data for dirtiness'
77b0c6f0403b dnode_is_dirty: check dnode and its data for dirtiness
focal:
The code change is a backport not from upstream (0.8 no longer maintained, apparently),
but comes from the original author of the patch (and noted with DEP-3 Origin:, great!),
and looks equivalent (same code change, just in a different function and context).
[4]
links:
[1] https:/
[2] https:/
[3] https:/
[4] https:/