[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121130230900.GA12674@infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 18:09:00 -0500
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...ionio.com>,
Chris Mason <clmason@...ionio.com>,
Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Jeff Chua <jeff.chua.linux@...il.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Do a proper locking for mmap and block size change
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 09:40:41AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> So it was based on this interface?
Based on that. I had dropped the inode operation as it's not really
a generic operation but a callback for either the buffered I/O code
or direct I/O and should be treated as such. I've also split the
single multiplexer function into individual ones, but the underlying
data structure and fundamental operations are the same.
> (I went looking for this code on google a couple of days ago so I
> could point at it and say "we should be using an iomap structure,
> not buffer heads", but it looks like I never posted it to fsdevel or
> the xfs lists...)
Your version defintively was up on your kernel.org XFS tree, that's what
I started from.
I'll have a long plane right tonight, let's see if I can get the direct
I/O version updated.
--
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