On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 02:12:10PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 06/17/2013 03:10 AM, Zheng Liu wrote:
> > Dave, that would be great if you could do your testing again to confirm
> > this patch is useful.
>
> I was able to apply this to Ted's
>
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4.git/
>
> "ext4/dev" tree with a bit of fuzz. What did you generate this against,
> btw?
Ah, sorry, I forgot to mention that this patch bases against ext4/master
branch. Now ext4/dev branch has some regression when I run xfstests.
So I don't base against this branch to generate my patch.
Ted, I notice that now in ext4 tree we have 'dev', 'dev-with-revert',
and 'dev2' branches. Which one is the best to generate a new patch for
the next merge window?
>
> It does seem to be functioning OK for me, and passes the other tests
> that saw so much spinlock contention previously. You can add my
> Tested-by if you like.
Thanks for your testing.
Regards,
- Zheng
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
