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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\]\s+kill\s+BMAPI_UNWRITTEN\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [PATCH] kill BMAPI_UNWRITTEN (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 17:41:03 +0200; There is no reason to go through xfs_iomap for the BMAPI_UNWRITTEN because it has nothing in common with the other cases. Instead check for the shutdown filesystem in xfs_end_bio_unwritten and perfor; /archives/xfs/2007-09/msg00055.html (10,404 bytes)
2. Re: [PATCH] kill BMAPI_UNWRITTEN (score: 1): Author: "Bhagi rathi" <jahnu77@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 01:04:55 +0530; The reason for eliminating BMAPI_UNWRITTEN is not clear. It is ideal to keep all the block map interfaces and information to go through xfs_iomap, xfs_bmapi functionality. Thanks, -Saradhi. [[HTML al; /archives/xfs/2007-09/msg00060.html (13,474 bytes)
3. Re: [PATCH] kill BMAPI_UNWRITTEN (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:02:07 +0200; Despit it's name xfs_iomap_write_unwritten is not a block map interface. Just take a look at the code, it does not use the block allocator data structures at all, and it does not do the central xfs_b; /archives/xfs/2007-09/msg00072.html (7,908 bytes)
4. [PATCH] kill BMAPI_UNWRITTEN (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 17:41:03 +0200; ucture. I; /archives/xfs/2007-09/msg00456.html (10,404 bytes)
5. Re: [PATCH] kill BMAPI_UNWRITTEN (score: 1): Author: "Bhagi rathi" <jahnu77@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 01:04:55 +0530; result, w; /archives/xfs/2007-09/msg00461.html (13,474 bytes)
6. Re: [PATCH] kill BMAPI_UNWRITTEN (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:02:07 +0200; > / ... g; /archives/xfs/2007-09/msg00473.html (7,908 bytes)
7. [PATCH] kill BMAPI_UNWRITTEN (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 17:41:03 +0200; There is no reason to go through xfs_iomap for the BMAPI_UNWRITTEN because it has nothing in common with the other cases. Instead check for the shutdown filesystem in xfs_end_bio_unwritten and perfor; /archives/xfs/2007-09/msg00857.html (10,404 bytes)
8. Re: [PATCH] kill BMAPI_UNWRITTEN (score: 1): Author: "Bhagi rathi" <jahnu77@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 01:04:55 +0530; The reason for eliminating BMAPI_UNWRITTEN is not clear. It is ideal to keep all the block map interfaces and information to go through xfs_iomap, xfs_bmapi functionality. Thanks, -Saradhi. [[HTML al; /archives/xfs/2007-09/msg00862.html (13,534 bytes)
9. Re: [PATCH] kill BMAPI_UNWRITTEN (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:02:07 +0200; Despit it's name xfs_iomap_write_unwritten is not a block map interface. Just take a look at the code, it does not use the block allocator data structures at all, and it does not do the central xfs_b; /archives/xfs/2007-09/msg00874.html (8,040 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]