On Wed 27-07-11 22:04:41, Wu Fengguang wrote: > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 09:57:30PM +0800, Jan Kara wrote: > > On iue 26-07-11 12:13:22, Wu Fengguang wrote: > > f7d2b1e writeback: account per-bdi accumulated written pages > > e98be2d writeback: bdi write bandwidth estimation > > 00821b0 writeback: show bdi write bandwidth in debugfs > > 7762741 writeback: consolidate variable names in balance_dirty_pages() > > c42843f writeback: introduce smoothed global dirty limit > > ffd1f60 writeback: introduce max-pause and pass-good dirty limits > > e1cbe23 writeback: trace global_dirty_state > > 1a12d8b writeback: scale IO chunk size up to half device bandwidth > > > > But why do you think these patches should be merged? f7d2b1e, 7762741 are > > probably OK to go but don't have much sense without the rest. The other > > patches do not have any Acked-by or Reviewed-by from anyone and I don't > > think they are really obvious enough to not deserve some. > > Sorry I overlooked the Acked-by/Reviewed-by principle, which is > definitely good practice to follow. However given that Linus has > merged the patches and they do look like pretty safe changes, we may > consider watch and improve the algorithms based on them. :-| Well, at least c42843f and 1a12d8b do not look "pretty safe" to me. But when it already happened, let's work with what we have. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>