On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2012-01-19 09:44:36, Li Wang wrote: >> >> >> Hi, >> Thanks Cong Wang for the kind reminding regarding the patch format. > > The commit message still needs some work. But there's no need to drag > out the process for a fix like this, so I'll rewrite the commit message > and reply to this email with the cleaned up version. Let me know if you > have any problems with that. You'll still be credited as the author. > > For future kernel patches, please see "15) The canonical patch format" > of Documentation/SubmittingPatches and "5.4: PATCH FORMATTING AND > CHANGELOGS" of Documentation/development-process/5.Posting for more > information on how the commit message should be written. > > Also, your email came across in base64 encoding. I'm not sure of the > reason for that or how to fix it. > >> We did notice that the total_remaining_zeroes need be revised as well, >> and the start_offset_in_page, num_bytes need not be revised (always smaller > > Yes, size_t will work fine, as Linus confirmed. > >> than PAGE_CACHE_SIZE, even the huge page size is supported, >> the 4G page size is not present in the current world?) >> but we forget to include the revision for total_remaining_zeroes, so here comes the patch. > > I really appreciate the patch - thanks! Tyler, Is this the problem behind our long standing tor-download-on-ecryptfs-hangs-cpu bug? * https://bugs.launchpad.net/ecryptfs/+bug/431975 -- :-Dustin Dustin Kirkland Chief Architect Gazzang, Inc. www.gazzang.com -- 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
