truncate_inode_pages_range patch to mainline ?

truncate_inode_pages_range patch to mainline ?

[Badari Pulavarty]

Hi Andrew,

I would like to find out, what your plans and/or concerns
to push

	reiser4-truncate_inode_pages_range.patch

from your -mm tree to mainline ? I need this for
my madvise(REMOVE) work. And also, I see that 
madvise(REMOVE) is not in -mm2 also. Do you still
have concerns with it ?

Thanks,
Badari

Re: truncate_inode_pages_range patch to mainline ?

[Andrew Morton]

Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> I would like to find out, what your plans and/or concerns
> to push
> 
> 	reiser4-truncate_inode_pages_range.patch
> 
> from your -mm tree to mainline ?

Well that's part of the reiser4 patch series.  It can be fed forward if we
need it, of course.

> I need this for my madvise(REMOVE) work.

That's OK.

> And also, I see that 
> madvise(REMOVE) is not in -mm2 also. Do you still
> have concerns with it ?

I haven't looked much at the latest version yet, sorry.  The
two-weeks-after-release window isn't a good time to be looking at new
features, so there's quite a lot of material saved up for the
six-week-interregnum.

But yes, your patch still sucks ;)

Re: truncate_inode_pages_range patch to mainline ?

[Badari Pulavarty]

On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 11:05 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Andrew,
> > 
> > I would like to find out, what your plans and/or concerns
> > to push
> > 
> > 	reiser4-truncate_inode_pages_range.patch
> > 
> > from your -mm tree to mainline ?
> 
> Well that's part of the reiser4 patch series.  It can be fed forward if we
> need it, of course.

Please do - if you don't have concerns with it.

> 
> > I need this for my madvise(REMOVE) work.
> 
> That's OK.
> 
> > And also, I see that 
> > madvise(REMOVE) is not in -mm2 also. Do you still
> > have concerns with it ?
> 
> I haven't looked much at the latest version yet, sorry.  The
> two-weeks-after-release window isn't a good time to be looking at new
> features, so there's quite a lot of material saved up for the
> six-week-interregnum.

There is no changes in the last version, except 1 page changelog
to include the discussions & future plans.

I am okay, as long as I am in the queue for next release. I was
hoping to get more testing in your -mm tree, in the meanwhile.

> 
> But yes, your patch still sucks ;)

I know :) 

Any suggestion on making it less sucky ? I really need this :(

Thanks,
Badari