On Sat, 11 Feb 2023 06:52:02 +0000, Shivam Kumar <shivam.kumar1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Hi Marc, > > > > I'm proposing this new implementation to address the concern you > > raised regarding dirty quota being a non-generic feature with the > > previous implementation. This implementation decouples dirty quota > > from dirty logging for the ARM64 arch. We shall post a similar > > implementation for x86 if this looks good. With this new > > implementation, dirty quota can be enforced independent of dirty > > logging. Dirty quota is now in bytes and > > Hi Marc, > > Thank you for your valuable feedback so far. Looking forward to your > feedback on this new proposition. I'm not sure what you are expecting from me here. I've explained in great details what I wanted to see, repeatedly. This above says nothing other than "we are going to do *something* that matches your expectations". My answer is, to quote someone else, "show me the code". Until then, I don't have much to add. Thanks, M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
