On 06/10/2010 12:46 AM, Al Viro wrote: > On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 04:43:23PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote: >> On 06/09/2010 03:45 PM, Al Viro wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 02:13:00PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote: >>> >>>> Al hi. >>>> >>>> Please take this through your tree. And/or tell me if you need it >>>> reorder with your ->evict patches. >>> >>> Um... Don't we need to free on-disk data blocks when inode gets deleted? >> >> No, the OSD device takes care of that when you send it an OSD_REMOVE >> command. > > OK, ver5 applied to for-next, evict_inode rediffed. Should show up on > git.kernel.org shortly. Thank you Al. I'm also publishing a few exofs patches on -next through the osd tree. I have test merges of: - Base Linus tree - as of today + merge vfs/for-next + merge vfs/evict_inode + merge osd/linux-next - based on Linus By visual inspection of vfs/evict_inode and vfs/for-next they should not conflict I will monitor linux-next carefully to make sure we are clean. If there are problems I'll base my tree on vfs/for-next, which should be good as long as you don't rebase. Thanks again Boaz -- 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
