On Wed, 9 Jun 2010 11:44:49 -0400 tytso@xxxxxxx wrote: > On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 02:17:55PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > The real issue is that it's almost certainly an overdesign. Let's > > > get rid of the bogus uses first and figure out what's happening in > > > what remains, OK? > > > > That would be good. > > Can we figure out what the new names will be for these accessor > functions, sb_mark_dirty(), sb_mark_clean(), sb_is_dirty(). > and then pursuade Linus to be willing to add patch #1 in > this series to add these accessor functions (without any users for > these functions, that would wait until the next merge window) to > 2.6.35-rc3 or -rc4, please? I expect he'd be OK with that. > It will make life much easier for fs maintainers to merge the patches, > especially if they've done some cleanup to reduce the bogus places > where s_dirt was getting set in the first place. For that reason. -- 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
