[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170308150227.GA20801@linux-80c1.suse>
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 07:02:27 -0800
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To: Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
jack@...e.cz, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, mhocko@...e.com,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
andreas.dilger@...el.com, jsimmons@...radead.org,
lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] staging/lustre: Use generic range rwlock
On Tue, 07 Mar 2017, Oleg Drokin wrote:
>On Mar 7, 2017, at 12:03 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>
>> This replaces the in-house version, which is also derived
>> from Jan's interval tree implementation.
>>
>> Cc: oleg.drokin@...el.com
>> Cc: andreas.dilger@...el.com
>> Cc: jsimmons@...radead.org
>> Cc: lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
>> ---
>> XXX: compile tested only. In house uses 'ulong long', generic uses 'ulong', is this a problem?
>
>Hm, cannot seem to find the other patches in this series anywhere to verify and my subscription to linux-kernel broke as it turns out.
You can find the full series here:
https://lwn.net/Articles/716383/
>You mean the range is ulong? So only can have this working up to 2G offsets on the
>32bit systems and then wrap around?
Yes.
Thanks,
Davidlohr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists