On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 04:29:31PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 02:04:00AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 03:56:19PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > they are rebased not to require the inode allocator patchset. I think that Jan > > > > is also going to repost his 'Fix overallocation in xfs_buf_allocate_memory()' > > > > based upon Dave's suggestions. It's best not to depend upon that either. What > > > > do you say, Dave? > > > > > > I reorder my local patch set and repost it after running it through > > > some testing.... > > > > Sorry, I totally misunderstood the initial issue - I though Ben had my > > series applied, and thus yours didn't apply. > > No, other way around ;) > > But I'm going to leave Jan kara's buffer cache over-allocation bug > fix ahead my list, because that has to go into 3.5-rcX as it is a > regression fix.... > > FWIW, Ben, there's a few reviewed bug fixes on the list that are > outstanding that need to go to Linus ASAP: > > http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-06/msg00154.html > http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-06/msg00134.html > http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-06/msg00056.html (regression) > > Can you take care of them please? Add to that: http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-05/msg00352.html which also needs to go to Linus to fix an issue introduced in the 3.5-rc1 merge... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
