[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZG/VyvdvM2l1kBnm@moria.home.lan>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 17:40:26 -0400
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, cluster-devel@...hat.com,
"Darrick J . Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dhowells@...hat.com,
linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH 06/32] sched: Add
task_struct->faults_disabled_mapping
On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 01:58:13AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 04:09:02AM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > Well, it seems like you are talking about something else than the
> > > existing cases in gfs2 and btrfs, that is you want full consistency
> > > between direct I/O and buffered I/O. That's something nothing in the
> > > kernel has ever provided, so I'd be curious why you think you need it
> > > and want different semantics from everyone else?
> >
> > Because I like code that is correct.
>
> Well, start with explaining your definition of correctness, why everyone
> else is "not correct", an how you can help fixing this correctness
> problem in the existing kernel. Thanks for your cooperation!
BTW, if you wanted a more serious answer, just asking for the commit
message to be expanded would be a better way to ask...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists