Message ID | cover.1645558375.git.riteshh@linux.ibm.com |
---|---|
Headers | show
Return-Path: <SRS0=8/cz=TF=vger.kernel.org=linux-ext4-owner@ozlabs.org> X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: bilbo.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=KrTwCpKu; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from gandalf.ozlabs.org (gandalf.ozlabs.org [150.107.74.76]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by bilbo.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4K39rd5Hk9z9sG7 for <incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org>; Wed, 23 Feb 2022 07:34:41 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from gandalf.ozlabs.org (gandalf.ozlabs.org [150.107.74.76]) by gandalf.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4K39rc5Qmcz4xPt for <incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org>; Wed, 23 Feb 2022 07:34:40 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by gandalf.ozlabs.org (Postfix) id 4K39rc5NBNz4xn3; Wed, 23 Feb 2022 07:34:40 +1100 (AEDT) Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: gandalf.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=vger.kernel.org (client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; helo=out1.vger.email; envelope-from=linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org; receiver=<UNKNOWN>) Authentication-Results: gandalf.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=KrTwCpKu; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by gandalf.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4K39rc5KCGz4xPt for <patchwork-incoming@ozlabs.org>; Wed, 23 Feb 2022 07:34:40 +1100 (AEDT) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235495AbiBVUfE (ORCPT <rfc822;patchwork-incoming@ozlabs.org>); Tue, 22 Feb 2022 15:35:04 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48996 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231694AbiBVUfD (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>); Tue, 22 Feb 2022 15:35:03 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC40878042; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 12:34:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 21MItHh0008673; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 20:34:33 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=hMea9uduwb9bjCvLXXOBoz4/k4QC2MrrWULG7C7iOlI=; b=KrTwCpKuGDuBCvg1X1WlSVSWbmLeeB7pxpcQdiO2UYF3RvoTpXcXLLdpGLEDlzfDliGQ LWPIiXBJawU9EZngtSyBjMTnt7lAkOYta9moHH8oVO/6k3qGJeGYrfyqlDBZgIR9Xu9G jp7tEOU+PAFcM81ndF4rlXzRrf8oULs9p2VmPsdR6KYIv1bqNbi6XI2IugX/lInmqlc7 EbakhB7H7wcbm3iKyEZlKlnz2ZDOwOnmHpBAVwXN7CPh8XZpSSZ24PydQLj7OKrpAwgA AhaAxMNOutmlxeF3vGmEa+hCloscL/yMHb3ftLU5Sr61ylksNotiVUnbSOMw0Dx3hvQk jQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3ed34ueetv-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 22 Feb 2022 20:34:33 +0000 Received: from m0098393.ppops.net (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 21MJFD3h014896; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 20:34:32 GMT Received: from ppma01fra.de.ibm.com (46.49.7a9f.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [159.122.73.70]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3ed34ueet0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 22 Feb 2022 20:34:32 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma01fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma01fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 21MKJBnu014899; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 20:34:30 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay13.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.198]) by ppma01fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3ear694chk-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 22 Feb 2022 20:34:29 +0000 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (mk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 21MKYRn350069924 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 22 Feb 2022 20:34:27 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5898C42041; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 20:34:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFD024203F; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 20:34:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost (unknown [9.43.75.136]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Feb 2022 20:34:24 +0000 (GMT) From: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com> To: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Cc: Harshad Shirwadkar <harshadshirwadkar@gmail.com>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com> Subject: [RFC 0/9] ext4: Improve FC trace events and discuss one FC failure Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2022 02:04:08 +0530 Message-Id: <cover.1645558375.git.riteshh@linux.ibm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.31.1 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: GrsoOnylZi7RJx6GrBZcsCmyEdgZZ3Di X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: YCuYLMcRtreZgTdQ4L7cqH1iRhui65Oz Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.816,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.62.513 definitions=2022-02-22_07,2022-02-21_02,2021-12-02_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 clxscore=1015 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=727 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2201110000 definitions=main-2202220126 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: <linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org> X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org |
Series |
ext4: Improve FC trace events and discuss one FC failure
|
expand
|
Ritesh, Were you going to be sending a revised version of this patch series? Thanks! - Ted
On 22/03/09 12:48PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > Ritesh, > > Were you going to be sending a revised version of this patch series? Hello Ted, Due to some unexpected guests at home, I was on leave since last weekend. I am starting to work from today. Let me work on the revised version of this patch series. I will try to complete it before end of day i.e. before our call. -ritesh