Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\]\s+sanitize\s+xfs_initialize

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\]\s+sanitize\s+xfs_initialize_vnode\s*$/: 30 ]

Total 30 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author:; Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:06:06 +0200; --end quoted text--; /archives/xfs/2008-07/msg00397.html (29,652 bytes)
2. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author:; Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 21:51:10 +0200; Rediffed to apply ontop of Dave's and my vnode helper cleanups: Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Index: linux-2.6-xfs/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_iops.c == -- linux-2.6-xfs.orig/fs/xfs/linux-2.; /archives/xfs/2008-07/msg00414.html (22,661 bytes)
3. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: xxxxx>; Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:16:15 +1000; Looks good and has been passing testing here for the past week... One question, though: Do we still need that barrier()? Or has the reason for it existing been lost in the mists of time? Regardless,; /archives/xfs/2008-07/msg00454.html (9,480 bytes)
4. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: xxxxx>; Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 08:20:02 +0200; Good question. I wonder why it's there in the first place.; /archives/xfs/2008-07/msg00455.html (8,289 bytes)
5. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: xxxxx>; Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:57:08 +0200; And another rediff after the vnode removal which was supposed to apply after this patch. Any chance to get in before it gets three month old? Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Index: linu; /archives/xfs/2008-07/msg00555.html (23,116 bytes)
6. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: xxxxx>; Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 11:02:42 +1000; I thought I got this one in already, apparently not, going in now. Cheers, -- Niv Sardi; /archives/xfs/2008-07/msg00557.html (8,038 bytes)
7. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:06:06 +0200; --end quoted text--; /archives/xfs/2008-07/msg01020.html (29,652 bytes)
8. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 21:51:10 +0200; Rediffed to apply ontop of Dave's and my vnode helper cleanups: Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Index: linux-2.6-xfs/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_iops.c == -- linux-2.6-xfs.orig/fs/xfs/linux-2.; /archives/xfs/2008-07/msg01037.html (22,661 bytes)
9. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: rkgw@xxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:16:15 +1000; Looks good and has been passing testing here for the past week... One question, though: Do we still need that barrier()? Or has the reason for it existing been lost in the mists of time? Regardless,; /archives/xfs/2008-07/msg01077.html (9,480 bytes)
10. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 08:20:02 +0200; Good question. I wonder why it's there in the first place.; /archives/xfs/2008-07/msg01078.html (8,289 bytes)
11. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: 82@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:57:08 +0200; And another rediff after the vnode removal which was supposed to apply after this patch. Any chance to get in before it gets three month old? Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Index: linu; /archives/xfs/2008-07/msg01178.html (23,116 bytes)
12. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: holt@xxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 11:02:42 +1000; I thought I got this one in already, apparently not, going in now. Cheers, -- Niv Sardi; /archives/xfs/2008-07/msg01180.html (8,038 bytes)
13. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 15:05:46 +0200; --end quoted text--; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00412.html (27,153 bytes)
14. Re: [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 15:05:46 +0200; --end quoted text--; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00872.html (27,153 bytes)
15. [PATCH] sanitize xfs_initialize_vnode (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 12:52:15 +0200; Sanitize setting up the Linux indode. Setting up the xfs_inode <-> inode link is opencoded in xfs_iget_core now because that's the only place it needs to be done, xfs_initialize_vnode is renamed to x; /archives/xfs/2008-05/msg00030.html (20,907 bytes)
16. ->setattr (score: 1): Author: >; Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 08:36:22 +0200; --end quoted text--; /archives/xfs/2008-05/msg00290.html (25,711 bytes)
17. warnings (score: 1): Author: >; Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 10:21:21 +0200; Updated to apply ontop of the case-insensitive filename changes. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Index: linux-2.6-xfs/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_iops.c == -- linux-2.6-xfs.orig/fs/xfs/linux-2; /archives/xfs/2008-05/msg00327.html (22,496 bytes)
18. e (score: 1): Author: >; Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 12:52:15 +0200; stem is not able to support; /archives/xfs/2008-05/msg00514.html (20,907 bytes)
19. lways set a/c/mtime through ->setattr (score: 1): Author: xx>; Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 08:36:22 +0200; Feel free to send a patch.; /archives/xfs/2008-05/msg00774.html (25,711 bytes)
20. VIEW: Remove kmem_free build warnings (score: 1): Author: xx>; Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 10:21:21 +0200; t it :) --end quoted text--; /archives/xfs/2008-05/msg00811.html (22,496 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]