Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030361AbXAEHCR (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jan 2007 02:02:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030359AbXAEHCR (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jan 2007 02:02:17 -0500 Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([62.242.22.158]:2407 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030355AbXAEHCO (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jan 2007 02:02:14 -0500 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 08:02:33 +0100 From: Jens Axboe To: Suparna Bhattacharya Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-aio@kvack.org, drepper@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jakub@redhat.com, mingo@elte.hu Subject: Re: [PATCHSET 1][PATCH 0/6] Filesystem AIO read/write Message-ID: <20070105070230.GJ11203@kernel.dk> References: <20061227153855.GA25898@in.ibm.com> <20061228082308.GA4476@in.ibm.com> <20070103141556.82db0e81.akpm@osdl.org> <20070104045621.GA8353@in.ibm.com> <20070104090242.44dd8165.akpm@osdl.org> <20070105062841.GA2653@in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070105062841.GA2653@in.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2193 Lines: 54 On Fri, Jan 05 2007, Suparna Bhattacharya wrote: > On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 09:02:42AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 10:26:21 +0530 > > Suparna Bhattacharya wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 02:15:56PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 13:53:08 +0530 > > > > Suparna Bhattacharya wrote: > > > > > > > > > This patchset implements changes to make filesystem AIO read > > > > > and write asynchronous for the non O_DIRECT case. > > > > > > > > Unfortunately the unplugging changes in Jen's block tree have trashed these > > > > patches to a degree that I'm not confident in my repair attempts. So I'll > > > > drop the fasio patches from -mm. > > > > > > I took a quick look and the conflicts seem pretty minor to me, the unplugging > > > changes mostly touch nearby code. > > > > Well... the conflicts (both mechanical and conceptual) are such that a > > round of retesting is needed. > > > > > Please let know how you want this fixed up. > > > > > > >From what I can tell the comments in the unplug patches seem to say that > > > it needs more work and testing, so perhaps a separate fixup patch may be > > > a better idea rather than make the fsaio patchset dependent on this. > > > > Patches against next -mm would be appreciated, please. Sorry about that. > > > > I _assume_ Jens is targetting 2.6.21? > > When is the next -mm likely to be out ? > > I was considering regenerating the blk unplug patches against the > fsaio changes instead of the other way around, if Jens were willing to > accept that. But if the next -mm is just around the corner then its > not an issue. I don't really care much, but I work against mainline and anything but occasional one-off generations of a patch against a different base is not very likely. The -mm order should just reflect the merge order of the patches, what is the fsaio target? -- Jens Axboe - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/