Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
> Your CONFIG_BLOCK patches did a decent job of trashing your
> fs-cache-make-kafs-* patches, btw. What's up with that? OK, it's sensible
> for people to work against mainline but the net effect of doing that is to
> create a mess for other people to clean up.
It seems the only problem in my patches is that the file address space
operations have had the sync_pages op removed in a patch in the
disable-block-layer patchset as it's no longer necessary.
However, as I suspect you're applying the block patches *before* the FS-Cache
patches, I can't give you an incremental patch that you can apply after the
other fs-cache-make-kafs-* patches, since you need to modify the first patch
(fs-cache-make-kafs-use-fs-cache.patch) to get it to apply at all now.
So, I could issue a revised AFS+FS-Cache patch, would that do? Or would you
rather have a patch that you can apply to the one you already have directly
and modify it in place?
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/
[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]
