On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:36:59AM -0500, Ben Myers wrote:
> Hey Fellas,
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 04:29:31PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 02:04:00AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 03:56:19PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > > > they are rebased not to require the inode allocator patchset. I
> > > > > think that Jan
> > > > > is also going to repost his 'Fix overallocation in
> > > > > xfs_buf_allocate_memory()'
> > > > > based upon Dave's suggestions. It's best not to depend upon that
> > > > > either. What
> > > > > do you say, Dave?
> > > >
> > > > I reorder my local patch set and repost it after running it through
> > > > some testing....
> > >
> > > Sorry, I totally misunderstood the initial issue - I though Ben had my
> > > series applied, and thus yours didn't apply.
> > No, other way around ;)
> Right. Dave's buffer changes don't apply without Christoph's inode allocator
> patchset and Jan's overallocation fix.
No, it only requires Jan's buffer allocation fix. I reordered my
series on a curent tre here yesterday afternoon, and it applied
without conflicts or fuzz on top of jan's patch....
> That'll be great... I too will make reviewing (and testing) these a high
> priority. Just keep in mind we don't control Jan's schedule...
If that' such a problem, I'll do the one line change and resend it....