[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181109150859.GA13643@fieldses.org>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2018 10:08:59 -0500
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Martin Wilck <mwilck@...e.de>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Frank Filz <ffilzlnx@...dspring.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/12] fs/locks: create a tree of dependent requests.
On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 05:24:04PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> Thanks pretty thorough - and even looks correct.
> I'll re-reading some time when it isn't late, and maybe make it into a
> comment in the code.
> I agree, this sort of documentation can be quite helpful.
OK. The idea looks sound to me, and the only problems I found were
documentation. (I'd like this and the details in the 0/12 mail captured
somewhere. And if we came up with better blocker/blocked/block naming
I'd be happier, though I definitely wouldn't want the patches help up
for that.) Feel free to add my ACK to the series.
--b.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists