On 03/20/12 22:11, NeilBrown wrote: > On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 17:54:05 +0100 Jes.Sorensen@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> From: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@xxxxxxxxxx> >> This patch set implements a number of smaller cleanups, as well as >> fixing a couple of cases where we don't zero out the full buffer we >> just obtained via malloc. > > All applied and push out - thanks. There were a few conflict which some > stuff I was working on, but nothing serious. Excellent, thanks! >> The most controversial is probably patch 06 which caches the device >> block size for aligned read/writes in super1.c to avoid calling the >> ioctl() on each write. > > Yeah, it's a bit ugly, but seems reasonable. Yeah, I was trying to find the cleanest way of doing it. I am contemplating whether it makes sense to try and push this up the stack, but I figured starting out small like this would be better. > I think it might be nearly time for 3.2.4. Do you have any thoughts about > that? I think it would be a good time - I have found it relatively quiet on the bug report front since the 3.2.3 update, so jumping to 3.2.4 sounds good. Cheers, Jes -- 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
