xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 2/3] xfs: don't use ioends for direct write completions

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] xfs: don't use ioends for direct write completions
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 20:16:44 +1100
Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ocfs2-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20160208073121.GA30092@xxxxxx>
References: <1454524816-11392-1-git-send-email-hch@xxxxxx> <1454524816-11392-3-git-send-email-hch@xxxxxx> <20160208010026.GL31407@dastard> <20160208061731.GC27429@dastard> <20160208073121.GA30092@xxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 08:31:21AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 05:17:31PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > Right now this series is in a stable branch in the XFS tree:
> > 
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dgc/linux-xfs.git 
> > xfs-dio-fix-4.6
> > 
> > If you want to push it through some other tree, please let me know
> > when/where it is committed so I can rebuild the XFS for-next branch
> > appropriately from a stable commit/branch...
> 
> That's how I think it should be handled.  This would also allow the
> ext4 and ocfs2 maintainers to depend on the stable branch to clean
> up their direct I/O completion handling in this merge window if they
> want to.

I can't tell if you are saying what I've done is fine if the
xfs-dio-fix-4.6 branch is stable (so others can pull it) or whether
it should be in some other tree. Can you clarify, Christoph?

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

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