[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45FF7259.8090004@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 16:34:17 +1100
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC: David Chinner <dgc@....com>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1 of 2] block_page_mkwrite() Implementation V2
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 09:11:31PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>I've got the patches in -mm now. I hope they will get merged when the
>>the next window opens.
>>
>>I didn't submit the ->page_mkwrite conversion yet, because I didn't
>>have any callers to look at. It is is slightly less trivial than for
>>nopage and nopfn, so having David's block_page_mkwrite is helpful.
>
>
> Yes. I was just wondering whether it makes more sense to do this
> functionality directly ontop of ->fault instead of converting i over
> real soon.
I would personally prefer that, but I don't want to block David's
patch from being merged if the ->fault patches do not get in next
cycle. If the fault patches do make it in first, then yes we should
do the page_mkwrite conversion before merging David's patch.
I'll keep an eye on it, and try to do the right thing.
Thanks,
Nick
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
-
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