Re: [PATCH] xfs: undo block reservation correctly in xfs_trans_reserve()

Dave Chinner <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.file-systems.xfs.general
Message-ID <20160906223533.GL30056@dastard>
On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 07:50:45PM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 06:48:28PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 04:03:59PM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote:
> > > Fixes: 0d485ada404b ("xfs: use generic percpu counters for free block counter")
> > 
> > I really don't like this sort of "annotation". It wrongly implies
> > the commit was broken (it wasn't) and there's no scope for stating
> > the problem context. i.e.  that the problem is a minor regression in
> > a rarely travelled corner case that is unlikely to affect production
> > machines in any significant way. It's better to describe things with
> > all the relevant context:
> > 
> > "This is a regression introduced in commit ... and only occurs when
> > .... "
> 
> Makes sense, will do so.
> 
> > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Eryu Guan <[email protected]>
> > 
> > Not @redhat?
> 
> I thought that I'm employed by Red Hat as a QE not a filesystem
> developer, all filesystem patches I send reflect my own opinions not my
> employer's, so all silly mistakes I made in the patches are under my
> personal email too :)

Copyright assignments rarely work like that. It's a big grey area,
though, so I think you should check with your legal department as to
what you should use here.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
[email protected]

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.