Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:16:48 -0400
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
       LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Is nobh code still useful?
Message-ID: <20090923141648.GA15934@infradead.org>
References: <20090917135627.GB13660@duck.suse.cz> <4AB30AD1.7010400@us.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4AB30AD1.7010400@us.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 862
Lines: 18

On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 09:21:37PM -0700, Badari Pulavarty wrote:
> Originally it was supported on ext2. I added support nobh support for  
> ext3. At that time, the main
> issue/complaint was that, these bufferheads consume memory from  
> ZONE_NORMAL causing
> memory pressure on 32-bit (i386) configurations.

Yeah, I think that's a tradeof past it's days.  I'm all for nuking it,
and while we're at it we should also find a better way to integrate the
mpage bits.  Not using them is pretty dumb, so the default aops should
really be mpage if possible, else fall back without the need for
different sets of aops.

--
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/