> I assume that you're prepared to repair all that damage to your tree, but
> it seems a bit masochistic?
It's either this or have an inconsistent coding style throughout
raid5.c. I figure it is worth it to have reduced code duplication
between raid5 and raid6, and it makes it easier to add new cache
features going forward. I have a few more cleanups to add for a rev2 of
this patch, but I will hold that off until the rebase is done.
In other words, it seemed like a good idea at the time, but I am open
to suggestions.
-
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]
