| To: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 2/4] XFS: Use the inode tree for finding dirty inodes |
| From: | Mark Goodwin <markgw@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:00:57 +1000 |
| Cc: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <4886AF06.40808@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | SGI Engineering |
| References: | <1216556394-17529-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1216556394-17529-3-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080722042829.GB27123@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080722053019.GI6761@disturbed> <20080722072733.GA15376@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080723000548.GG5947@disturbed> <488692FB.1010101@xxxxxxx> <4886A9A3.8090805@xxxxxxxxxxx> <4886ADB6.5060109@xxxxxxx> <4886AF06.40808@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | markgw@xxxxxxx |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421) |
Eric Sandeen wrote: Mark Goodwin wrote:As above, just run QA for cleanups.Out of curiosity, will you trust this? You'll run QA anyway, right? yes we run it anyway, so maybe this (as a requirement) is overkill. And do you very often find errors in submitted patches by running QA? don't know, but it is part of the review process. For cleanups, bugs/regressions seem to be fairly rare (hence they're subtle and unexpected). I think you found one such regression a while back, (after a herculean effort). Cheers -- Mark |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 0/4] XFS: replace the mount inode list with radix tree traversals V2, Dave Chinner |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [UPDATED RFC] Create with EA initial work, Niv Sardi |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2/4] XFS: Use the inode tree for finding dirty inodes, Eric Sandeen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2/4] XFS: Use the inode tree for finding dirty inodes, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |