[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [rfc][patch 3/3] xfs: use new vmap API

To: Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [rfc][patch 3/3] xfs: use new vmap API
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 04:05:39 +0200
Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4897B05A.7040002@xxxxxxx>
References: <20080728123438.GA13926@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080728123703.GC13926@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4896A197.3090004@xxxxxxx> <200808042057.20607.nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <4897B05A.7040002@xxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Assuming patch 1 gets merged upstream, I think Andrew would normally send
off 2 and 3 to the XFS maintainers at that point (ie. when its prerequisites
are upstream) for you to merge. 

On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 11:43:54AM +1000, Lachlan McIlroy wrote:
> Okay.  When the time comes will you push the XFS changes to mainline
> or would you like us to?
> Nick Piggin wrote:
> >Thanks for taking a look. I'll send them over to -mm with patch 1,
> >then, for some testing.
> >
> >On Monday 04 August 2008 16:28, Lachlan McIlroy wrote:
> >>Looks good to me.
> >>
> >>Nick Piggin wrote:
> >>>Implement XFS's large buffer support with the new vmap APIs. See the vmap
> >>>rewrite patch for some numbers.

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