Re: [PATCH 00/19] BLOCK: Permit block layer to be disabled [try #5]

Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:

> Any remaining changes? Looks fine to me, although I wonder why you did
> not kill the block_sync_page() completely in AFS. Christophs analysis
> looked correct to me.

Aargh!  Forgot to save the buffer.

Yes, I meant to kill it completely.

David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • Re: [PATCH 00/19] BLOCK: Permit block layer to be disabled [try #5]
    • From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
  • [PATCH 00/19] BLOCK: Permit block layer to be disabled [try #5]
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] Rename lock_cpu_hotplug/unlock_cpu_hotplug
• Next by Date: HP XW6200: acpi errors vs SMP or Hyperthreading + bad memory detection, 2.6.16.28 and 2.6.17.11?
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 00/19] BLOCK: Permit block layer to be disabled [try #5]
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 00/19] BLOCK: Permit block layer to be disabled [try #5]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]