[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1334406974.2263.38.camel@koala>
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 15:36:11 +0300
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Maling List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux FS Maling List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fat: switch to fsinfo_inode
On Sat, 2012-04-14 at 20:51 +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
> Yes, I still worry about order. About ->sync_fs(), you are looking the
> following?
Hirofumi, you still did not explain why the order matters. If it
matters, it should be easy to explain.
But I will look at this and think about the ordering, thanks for
feed-back. But if you could explain why writing out FSINFO before inodes
is an issue, it'd be very helpful.
Thanks!
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (491 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists