Hi Amir,
On 2026/1/10 17:50, Amir Goldstein wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2026 at 8:27 AM Gao Xiang <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Linus,
Very sorry I sent an incorrect pull request which used an
outdated PATCH version (I just manually applied tags on the
incorrect version, but I didn't realize), I shouldn't make
the stupid mistake in the beginning.
Someone reminded me the mistake just now.
Could you please apply this pull request, I promise that I
won't make the similar fault again and I should be blamed.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
The following changes since commit 072a7c7cdbea4f91df854ee2bb216256cd619f2a:
erofs: don't bother with s_stack_depth increasing for now (2026-01-10
13:01:15 +0800)
are available in the Git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/xiang/erofs.git
tags/erofs-for-6.19-rc5-fixes-2
for you to fetch changes up to 0a7468a8de7a2721cc0cce30836726f2a3ac2120:
erofs: don't bother with s_stack_depth increasing for now [real fix]
(2026-01-10 15:13:12 +0800)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Changes since last update:
- Revert the incorrect outdated PATCH version
- Apply the correct fix of
"erofs: don't bother with s_stack_depth increasing for now"
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gao Xiang (2):
Revert "erofs: don't bother with s_stack_depth increasing for now"
erofs: don't bother with s_stack_depth increasing for now [real fix]
Gao,
You merged the wrong patch version by mistake - no real harm done.
Sadly, the merged one doesn't work for Android APEX (Sheng actually
claimed that PATCH v3 RESEND works instead of PATCH v3 [I'm very sorry
for v3 RESEND mark again here] and it was him found that the merged
pull request used wrong version and he gave me a private text hours
ago), see my explanation below.
But now that it was merged, for the sake of git history, I think it would
be better to merge a fix patch rather than revert + patch with same title.
My concern would be that people could merge incomplete patch chain,
but I'm fine to send a fix for the fix, I will do.
If you merge a fix patch you could properly attribute Report/Review/Tested-by
to Sheng Yong [1].
It's true that the merged patch already claims to work for Android APEX,
but it had a braino bug and this is what fix patches are for.
Sigh, the merged patch (PATCH v3) actually _breaks_ APEX (it's just
like PATCH v1/v2), because:
if (erofs_is_fileio_mode(sbi)) {
- sb->s_stack_depth =
- file_inode(sbi->dif0.file)->i_sb->s_stack_depth
+ 1;
- if (sb->s_stack_depth > FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH) {
- erofs_err(sb, "maximum fs stacking depth
exceeded");
+ inode = file_inode(sbi->dif0.file);
+ if ((inode->i_sb->s_op == &erofs_sops && !sb->s_bdev) ||
Here `!sb->s_bdev` is true for all file-backed mounts all the time,
so `!sb->s_bdev` equals to a no-op.
+ inode->i_sb->s_stack_depth) {
I will make a delta patch candidate with his "Reported-by:" and
"Tested-by:", I will try to send now.
It seems I need to sleep later because my brain is exhaused,
and always screwed things up, very very sorry about that.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
Thanks,
Amir.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/[email protected]/
