Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:52:24 +0200 | From | Jens Axboe <> | Subject | Re: merging the per-bdi writeback patchset |
| |
On Tue, Jun 23 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 01:12:10PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > Last time we discussed this you said you're happy with 2.6.32. I really > > > want to take a more detailed look and put that on the not so urgent list > > > because ou didn't seem to rush for .31. So my vote goes for waiting a > > > bit longer. > > > > Yeah, 2.6.32 works for me too, .31 would have been nice though so I > > don't have to carry it around anymore. But either is fine, if you and > > Andrew want more time to review this stuff, then lets just settle for > > .32. > > Yes, I'd really prefer more time. I also expect to come up with some > more changes in that area. Your patch makes the differences between > kupdate and pdflush-stye writeback look even more ugly then it already > is, so I want to see i there's some nicer way to handle it. I also want
Good point, should be easy enough to fold the two together.
> to take a look if it makes sense to distangle data integrity and > background writeback somehow.
That one is also on more list, would make the code flow a lot cleaner I suspect.
-- Jens Axboe
| |