[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160517091133.GA23943@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 02:11:33 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com,
maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com, david@...ma-star.at,
david@...morbit.com, dedekind1@...il.com, alex@...tthing.co,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, sasha.levin@...cle.com,
iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, rvaswani@...eaurora.org,
tony.luck@...el.com, shailendra.capricorn@...il.com,
kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, hughd@...gle.com,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net, vbabka@...e.cz
Subject: Re: UBIFS and page migration (take 3)
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 02:44:49PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Is this a Reviewed-by? :-)
I don't know the code well enough to feel qualified for a review. But
you get my:
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
> There are two classes of issues:
> a) filesystems that use buffer_migrate_page() but shouldn't
> b) filesystems that don't implement ->migratepage() and fallback_migrate_page()
> is not suitable.
>
> As starter we could kill the automatic assignment of fallback_migrate_page() and
> non-buffer_head filesystems need to figure out whether fallback_migrate_page()
> is suitable or not.
> UBIFS found out the hard way. ;-\
Yes, I think this would be a good start.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists