xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH -mm] rescue large xfs preferred iosize from the inode diet pa

To: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] rescue large xfs preferred iosize from the inode diet patch
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 18:19:18 -0500
Cc: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs mailing list <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20060922161040.609286fa.akpm@xxxxxxxx>
References: <45131334.6050803@xxxxxxxxxxx> <45134472.7080002@xxxxxxx> <20060922161040.609286fa.akpm@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Macintosh/20060909)
Andrew Morton wrote:

So the fix for this is coming soon (and the fix is different from the
one above).


eh?  Eric's patch is based on -mm, which includes the XFS git tree.  If I
go and merge the inode-diet patches from -mm, XFS gets broken until you
guys merge the above mystery patch.  (I prefer to merge the -mm patches
after all the git trees have gone, but sometimes maintainers dawdle and I
get bored of waiting).

Is git://oss.sgi.com:8090/nathans/xfs-2.6 obsolete, or are you hiding stuff
from me?  ;)


well it's in cvs:

http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/xfs-linux/linux-2.6/xfs_iops.c.diff?r1=text&tr1=1.254&r2=text&tr2=1.253&f=h

but I'm too lazy to check git on a friday evening. :)

Well, sgi-guys, I'll let you sort out which patch you want. Sorry for not checking cvs first!

-Eric


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>