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 ;)
But I'm going to leave Jan kara's buffer cache over-allocation bug
fix ahead my list, because that has to go into 3.5-rcX as it is a
regression fix....
FWIW, Ben, there's a few reviewed bug fixes on the list that are
outstanding that need to go to Linus ASAP:
http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-06/msg00154.html
http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-06/msg00134.html
http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-06/msg00056.html (regression)
Can you take care of them please?
> I still think reordering is better - I'm quite busy and I'd rather get
> your series reviewed first before redoing and retesting the inode
> allocator changes.
>
> In fact I'll start reviewing them in about 10 minutes after I've
> finished catching up on email for this morning.
Cool. I'm just rebasing right now....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
|