On Feb 15, 2011, at 10:03 AM, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Tue, 2011-02-15 at 09:43 -0500, William A. (Andy) Adamson wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Trond Myklebust >> <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 14:18 -0500, andros@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>> From: Fred Isaman <iisaman@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> Add a pg_test layout driver hook which is used to avoid coelescing I/O across >>>> layout stripes. >>> >>> Doesn't this belong before [PATCH 09/16] pnfs: wave 3: shift >>> pnfs_update_layout locations? >> >> The pg_test uses the pg_lseg declared in [PATCH 09/16] pnfs: wave 3: >> shift pnfs_update_layout locations, which is why the patches are >> ordered this way. > > What prevents you from moving the pg_lseg declaration into this patch, > and just relying on the initialisation being NULL? > > The current ordering means that applying 9/16 without 10/16 gives rise > to broken stripe sizes. OK - Good reason. -->Andy > > -- > Trond Myklebust > Linux NFS client maintainer > > NetApp > Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx > www.netapp.com > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
