[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1158179120.11112.2.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 15:25:19 -0500
From: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...tin.ibm.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@....ac.uk>, sct@...hat.com,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] set_page_buffer_dirty should skip unmapped buffers
On Fri, 2006-09-08 at 00:30 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> diff -rupX /home/jack/.kerndiffexclude
> linux-2.6.18-rc6/fs/jbd/commit.c
> linux-2.6.18-rc6-1-orderedwrite/fs/jbd/commit.c
> --- linux-2.6.18-rc6/fs/jbd/commit.c 2006-09-06 18:20:48.000000000
> +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.18-rc6-1-orderedwrite/fs/jbd/commit.c 2006-09-08
> 01:05:35.000000000 +0200
> @@ -160,6 +160,117 @@ static int journal_write_commit_record(j
> return (ret == -EIO);
> }
>
> +void journal_do_submit_data(struct buffer_head **wbuf, int bufs)
Is there any reason this couldn't be static?
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < bufs; i++) {
> + wbuf[i]->b_end_io = end_buffer_write_sync;
> + /* We use-up our safety reference in submit_bh() */
> + submit_bh(WRITE, wbuf[i]);
> + }
> +}
I'm rebasing the ext4 work on the latest -mm tree and would like to
avoid renaming this function in the jbd2 clone.
Thanks,
Shaggy
--
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists