linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 3/8] jbd2: Issue cache flush after checkpointing even with internal journal

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Sun, 18 Mar 2012 23:45:07 -0400
From:	Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] jbd2: Issue cache flush after checkpointing even
 with internal journal

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 09:59:35AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 13-03-12 22:17:45, Ted Tso wrote:
> > I'm not sure why you pulled out the code for
> > jbd2_journal_get_log_tail(), since there's no other usage of the
> > function, but it did make this commit harder to review.  It's good for
> > code movement patches to be segregated to their own commit, just to
> > make it easier to review....
>   I pulled the code out because the last patch in the series uses it from
> commit code. So it was not a deliberate code movement. But I agree it might
> have been easier to review if the code movement was a separate patch.
> Should I do that or have you already coped with the patch as is?

No, it's fine as it is.  I've merged your patches into the ext4 tree
for the upcoming merge window.  Thanks!!

							 Ted
--
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