Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, May 28 2009, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>> Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> That would be great, I would have no problem integrating such a feature.
>>> It definitely makes sense.
>> Hi Al, Christoph,
>>
>> unless you have objections against the whole idea, I wonder if
>> it would be possible to make the patches which wrap sb->s_dirt
>> usage go via VFS tree first, and then I'd continue the timer
>> optimization work separately. IMO, wrapping s_dirt makes sense
>> in general. I mean, patches 01-17 from this series.
>
> That makese sense, those are totally separate from the actual
> functionality.
Reminding ping.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)