From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758525Ab2HXRDV (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Aug 2012 13:03:21 -0400 Received: from twin.jikos.cz ([89.185.236.188]:47272 "EHLO twin.jikos.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753879Ab2HXRDT (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Aug 2012 13:03:19 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 3035 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2012 13:03:18 EDT Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 18:12:13 +0200 From: David Sterba To: Namjae Jeon Cc: Fengguang Wu , chris.mason@fusionio.com, mfasheh@suse.com, jlbec@evilplan.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vivek Trivedi , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] writeback: change nr_pages_dirtied argument into local variable Message-ID: <20120824161213.GB17430@twin.jikos.cz> Reply-To: dave@jikos.cz Mail-Followup-To: Namjae Jeon , Fengguang Wu , chris.mason@fusionio.com, mfasheh@suse.com, jlbec@evilplan.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vivek Trivedi , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com References: <1345283309-7768-1-git-send-email-linkinjeon@gmail.com> <20120819021554.GA16796@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2011-07-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 05:06:19PM +0900, Namjae Jeon wrote: > 2012/8/19, Fengguang Wu : > > On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 05:48:29AM -0400, Namjae Jeon wrote: > >> There is no reason nr_pages_dirtied is argument anymore. > >> because nr_pages_dirtied value from caller is not used in > >> balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited_nr function. > > > > Looks good to me. If the fs developers don't have problems with this, > > I'll apply it to the writeback tree. > Thanks Wu! > > Hi Chris, Mark, Joel. > > Would you check this patch ? Patch is ok from the btrfs side. david