On Mon, 9 Sep 2013, Milosz Tanski wrote: > David, > > I guess that's really a better question for Sage. He sent my branch > (which includes your changes) plus a whole slew of things over to > Linus. I'm going guess that a small follow on patch is simplest but > I'll let him comment. > > Here's the original pull request: > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137849853203101&w=2 ...and Linus just merged it a few minutes ago. This'll have to be a separate patch. Sorry! I have another pile of Ceph fixes that I will be sending in a week or so; let me know if you want me include the fix there. Thanks! sage > > Also, so far after making this change everything is peachy and theres > no other regressions. > > P.S: This is a resend because I did no hit reply to ALL, sorry for the > spam David. > > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 6:18 AM, David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Milosz Tanski <milosz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> I think that change does the trick. I had it running on the same > >> machine for 5 hours and had the kernel forcefully drop some of the > >> inodes in the cache (via drop caches) without a crash. I'll send a > >> proper patch email after you take a look and make sure I did the right > >> thing. > > > > Do you mind if I roll your change directly into my patch and reissue the set? > > Or would you rather have an extra patch at this time? > > > > David > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
