linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus' 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:45:44 +0100
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....EDU>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ext4 tree with Linus' tree

Hello, Stephen, Ted.

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:56:43PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the ext4 tree got a conflict in
> fs/ext4/super.c between commit fd89d5f2030a ("ext4: convert to
> alloc_workqueue()") from Linus' tree and commit 198868f35de9 ("ext4: Use
> single thread to perform DIO unwritten convertion") from the ext4 tree.
> 
> I just used the ext4 tree version.

Both are about the same conversion but the one using alloc_workqueue()
is better because 1. create_singlethread_workqueue() is going away and
2. it doesn't require strict ordering among queued works.

Ted, what do you think?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/