[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ac60affc-ac5c-2ee7-c1a6-9be39e7b43c9@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 09:06:30 +0700
From: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
To: Ammar Faizi <ammarfaizi2@...weeb.org>
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@...com>, Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
Filipe Manana <fdmanana@...e.com>,
Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Btrfs Mailing List <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Fsdevel Mailing List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
GNU/Weeb Mailing List <gwml@...r.gnuweeb.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 2/2] Documentation: btrfs: Document the influence
of wq_cpu_set to thread_pool option
On 2/27/23 17:02, Ammar Faizi wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 09:15:58AM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>> Why will the behavior be introduced in such future version (6.5)?
>
> It's not like it has been staged for the next merge window. It's still
> in an RFC state. The changes are not trivial and need further review.
>
> I don't know if it can hit the next merge window. As such, I picked a
> long distance for this proposal. If it ends up going upstream sooner, we
> can change this document.
>
OK, thanks!
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
Powered by blists - more mailing lists