On Mon, 2012-04-30 at 11:37 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-04-12 at 10:20 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 14:45 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > > From: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Commit a0375156 properly notes that superblock doesn't need to be marked
> > > as dirty when only number of free inodes / blocks / number of directories
> > > changes since that is recomputed on each mount anyway. However that comment
> > > leaves some unnecessary markings as dirty in place. Remove these.
> > >
> > > Artem: tested using xfstests for both journalled and non-journalled ext4.
> >
> > Hi Ted, what would be the fate of this patch-set?
>
> Hi Ted, I am sorry for being annoying, but what do you think about these
> patches?
Hi Ted, any chance for this stuff to hit 3.4?
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 16:53 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> Hi Ted, any chance for this stuff to hit 3.4?
Sorry, of course I actually meant the current merge window for 3.5.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 04:53:40PM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>
> Hi Ted, any chance for this stuff to hit 3.4?
>
Hi Artem,
I'm very sorry, this has been completely my fault; this has been an
absolutely crazy month this past May, and this just slipped off my
radar, and we're just out of time. I will make sure this patchset
gets reviewed and queued for 3.5.
- Ted
On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 11:16 -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> I'm very sorry, this has been completely my fault; this has been an
> absolutely crazy month this past May, and this just slipped off my
> radar, and we're just out of time. I will make sure this patchset
> gets reviewed and queued for 3.5.
No problem, thanks for reply. I think it would be safer if could take it
to your tree (providing it is OK) and it would go through the normal
cycle and hit 3.6, not 3.5. There is no rush with this - I need to take
care of several other file-systems before the whole kernel thread can be
killed anyway.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 11:16 -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> I will make sure this patchset
> gets reviewed and queued for 3.5.
Hi Ted,
just a reminder. The patch does not apply cleanly but the conflicts are
simple and they are around the SB checksum stuff. Do you want me to
re-send?
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy