[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/3] xfs: inode allocation should use unmapped buffers.

To: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] xfs: inode allocation should use unmapped buffers.
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 10:00:33 +1100
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20121126221253.GH27055@xxxxxxx>
References: <1353641065-14983-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1353641065-14983-2-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20121126221253.GH27055@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 04:12:53PM -0600, Ben Myers wrote:
> Hi Dave,
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 02:24:23PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Inode buffers do not need to be mapped as inodes are read or written
> > directly from/to the pages underlying the buffer. This fixes a
> > regression introduced by commit 611c994 ("xfs: make XBF_MAPPED the
> > default behaviour").
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> committed to git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/xfs.git, master and for-next.
> What's with the multiple Signed-off-by?  Is your cousin Dave getting involved
> in XFS development too?  Welcome!  ;)

Ah, I forgot the "-s" flag to guilt patchbomb which prevents it
git-send-email from adding signed-off-by lines from the local
repository committer. That's my mistake (it's the first time I've
ever done that), you can kill the ones from the david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


Dave Chinner

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