On Thu 04-06-09 13:11:42, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 04:59:11PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > Yes, that would be fine. Thanks. Luckily, the dependence is just one way > > (ext4 change has to go after the VFS patch) so it's just enough to merge > > that ext4 change some time after VFS changes go in. > > ext4: Add WARN_ON on unmapped dirty buffer_heads in writepage > fs: Don't clear dirty bits in block_write_full_page() > vfs: Unmap underlying metadata of new data buffers only when buffer is m > ext4: Make sure blocks are properly allocated under mmaped page even whe > vfs: Add better VFS support for page_mkwrite when blocksize < pagesize > > FYI, I've added the following to the unstable portion of the patch > queue, and have started running tests (fsx, fsstress, and dbench) > using 1k blocksizes, using a variety of ext4 mount options. So far, > things look good. Thanks for the merge and testing! > How goes the reviews/comments? Are we planning on pushing this to > Linus at the beginning of the next merge window? I'd like to get some VFS / MM people review the generic part of the change... I guess I'll post a request to linux-mm to catch more attention. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
