Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*correct\s+patch\s+was\s+Re\:\s+TAKE\s+\-\s+make\s+xfs\'s\s+in\s+memory\s+extents\s+host\s+byte\s+ordered\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*correct\s+patch\s+was\s+Re\:\s+TAKE\s+\-\s+make\s+xfs\'s\s+in\s+memory\s+extents\s+host\s+byte\s+ordered\s*$/: 6 ]

Total 6 documents matching your query.

1. correct patch was Re: TAKE - make xfs's in memory extents host byte ordered (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 03:09:12 +0200; ant to take the new kernel out for a spin please do. I would be interested in reports fr; /archives/xfs/2002-10/msg00228.html (9,381 bytes)
2. Re: correct patch was Re: TAKE - make xfs's in memory extents host byte ordered (score: 1): Author: Stephen Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>; Date: 11 Oct 2002 05:09:31 -0500; /archives/xfs/2002-10/msg00236.html (10,134 bytes)
3. te ordered (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 03:09:12 +0200; /repair. Also, a 'xfs_fsr' was run when we upgraded the kernel; /archives/xfs/2002-10/msg01007.html (9,381 bytes)
4. .4.18-14SGI_XFS_1.2a1] root xfs filesystem executable bits bug comeback? (score: 1): Author: Þen <tufan@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 11 Oct 2002 05:09:31 -0500; tition returns always true on all files with "test -x". Non-root mounted XFS partitions are OK. What kernel version(s)? charon:~# df -Th . Filesystem Type Size Used Avail Use%; /archives/xfs/2002-10/msg01015.html (10,134 bytes)
5. correct patch was Re: TAKE - make xfs's in memory extents host byte ordered (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 03:09:12 +0200; Last mail had the wrong patch. Here is the correct one that should actually compile -- linux/include/linux/byteorder/swab.h-o 2001-07-26 22:45:47.000000000 +0200 +++ linux/include/linux/byteorder/swa; /archives/xfs/2002-10/msg01786.html (9,533 bytes)
6. Re: correct patch was Re: TAKE - make xfs's in memory extents host byte ordered (score: 1): Author: Stephen Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>; Date: 11 Oct 2002 05:09:31 -0500; Are you sure that would help? We only call into __swab64() from XFS and, provided builtin_constant_p is doing its stuff this should turn into __fswab64 which will execute this code: __u32 h = x >> 32; /archives/xfs/2002-10/msg01794.html (10,313 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 6
Page: [1]