From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756691AbZIDILL (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Sep 2009 04:11:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756547AbZIDILJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Sep 2009 04:11:09 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:49787 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755446AbZIDILI (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Sep 2009 04:11:08 -0400 Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 10:11:08 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Stephen Rothwell , David Chinner , xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara , Felix Blyakher Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with the ext3 tree Message-ID: <20090904081108.GA19857@duck.suse.cz> References: <20090904095500.04205407.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20090903235652.GA7674@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090903235652.GA7674@lst.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri 04-09-09 01:56:52, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 09:55:00AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > 218604a0bf712976171798b1dd5c44d26d6d0ea4 ("xfs: Convert sync_page_range() > > to simple filemap_write_and_wait_range()") from the ext3 tree and commit > > 13e6d5cdde0e785aa943810f08b801cadd0935df ("xfs: merge fsync and O_SYNC > > handling") from the xfs tree. > > > > They both do the same thing (to this bit of code) ... I used the version > > from the xfs tree. > > Yes, the xfs tree one is the better one, the one in Jan's tree only > does about half of it. Should I drop the XFS chunk or will you rebase your XFS patch on top of my patch? The latter seems safer (since my patch series won't compile without the XFS change)... Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR