> From: Neil Brown [mailto:neilb@xxxxxxx] > On Friday September 21, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 18:27:35 -0700 > > Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Fix a couple bugs and provide documentation for the async_tx api. > > > > > > Neil, please 'ack' patch #3. > > > > > > git://lost.foo-projects.org/~dwillia2/git/iop async-tx-fixes-for-linus > > > > Well it looks like Neil is on vacation or is hiding from us or something. > > Neil is just not coping well with jet-lag.... > > Patch #3 looks good and necessary > Acked-By: NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx> > > I know that should probably be a "reviewed-by".... I was a bit I went ahead and added reviewed-by. > surprised that the "handle_completed_read_requests" call was so early > in handle_stripe5 - I don't think the code was originally that early. It is slightly earlier than 2.6.22 (outside the '/* now count some things */' loop) to make sure the R5_Wantfill flags from the last request have been cleared before starting a new one: /* maybe we can request a biofill operation * * new wantfill requests are only permitted while * STRIPE_OP_BIOFILL is clear */ if (test_bit(R5_UPTODATE, &dev->flags) && dev->toread && !test_bit(STRIPE_OP_BIOFILL, &sh->ops.pending)) set_bit(R5_Wantfill, &dev->flags); > But it is probably right. Hopefully my brain will have cleared by > Monday and I'll review it again then. > Ok, the tree is updated with 'Reviewed-by' tags and the proposed documentation updates from Randy and Shannon. git://lost.foo-projects.org/~dwillia2/git/iop async-tx-fixes-for-linus Dan Williams (3): async_tx: usage documentation and developer notes (v2) async_tx: fix dma_wait_for_async_tx raid5: fix ops_complete_biofill > NeilBrown -- Dan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
