[lkml]   [2011]   [May]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Adding an ugliness in __read_cache_page()?
On Mon, 23 May 2011, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 03:25:31PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > I find both ways ugly, but no nice alternative: introducing a new method
> > when the known callers are already tied to tmpfs/ramfs seems over the top.
> Calling into shmem directly is the less ugly variant.

Okay, that's good, thanks.

> Long term killing
> that tmpfs abuse would be even better, but I already lost that fight
> when it was initially added.

I'd better match your restraint and not fan the flames now -
I believe we're on opposite sides, or at least orthogonal on that.


 \ /
  Last update: 2011-05-23 18:25    [W:0.040 / U:2.376 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site