On Thu, Aug 22, 2002 at 01:50:19PM -0500, Steve Lord wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-08-22 at 13:50, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 22, 2002 at 01:46:02PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > > Hi Jim -
> > >
> > > Hm, was just talking about this with Christoph. :)
> > >
> > > XFS does use a bit of stack, but the code in XFS 1.1 (which is, I think,
> > > also in your -aa kernel) is probably much worse than what is currently
> > > in CVS. We're aware of the issue, and now apparently this same
> > > stack-check code is in the 2.4.20-preX kernels - so we'll keep an eye on
> > > it. As far as your current situation... I guess maybe we'll have to
> > > talk to Andrea about it, I don't know what he'll want to do about
> > > updating XFS code in his tree.
> > He's waiting for XFS 1.2 for the next update.
> And that one is a bit stalled right now. I think we have a number of
> open issues to resolve before we call something a release again.
Could you quickly list them (just curious) ?
The only thing I have pending is a partial ioctl32 translation for x86-64
(and possible ia64 too) for some XFS ioctls.