linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with the ext3 tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 4 Sep 2009 10:11:08 +0200
From:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	David Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, xfs-masters@....sgi.com,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Felix Blyakher <felixb@....com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with the ext3 tree

On Fri 04-09-09 01:56:52, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 09:55:00AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > 218604a0bf712976171798b1dd5c44d26d6d0ea4 ("xfs: Convert sync_page_range()
> > to simple filemap_write_and_wait_range()") from the ext3 tree and commit
> > 13e6d5cdde0e785aa943810f08b801cadd0935df ("xfs: merge fsync and O_SYNC
> > handling") from the xfs tree.
> > 
> > They both do the same thing (to this bit of code) ... I used the version
> > from the xfs tree.
> 
> Yes, the xfs tree one is the better one, the one in Jan's tree only
> does about half of it.
  Should I drop the XFS chunk or will you rebase your XFS patch on top of
my patch? The latter seems safer (since my patch series won't compile
without the XFS change)...

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/