[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070203012259.GA27300@wotan.suse.de>
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 02:22:59 +0100
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Filesystems <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...il.com>,
Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/9] buffered write deadlock fix
On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 03:52:32PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 11:31:37 +0100 (CET)
> Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de> wrote:
>
> > The following set of patches attempt to fix the buffered write
> > locking problems (and there are a couple of peripheral patches
> > and cleanups there too).
> >
> > Patches against 2.6.20-rc6. I was hoping that 2.6.20-rc6-mm2 would
> > be an easier diff with the fsaio patches gone, but the readahead
> > rewrite clashes badly :(
>
> Well fsaio is restored, but there's now considerable doubt over it due to
> the recent febril febrility.
>
> How bad is the clash with the readahead patches?
I don't think it would be so bad that one couldn't merge readahead
back on top quite easily... The fsaio ones are a little harder because
they change generic_file_buffered_write.
> Clashes with git-block are likely, too.
>
> Bugfixes come first, so I will drop readahead and fsaio and git-block to get
> this work completed if needed - please work agaisnt mainline.
OK.
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists