> Do we really want a separate queue for each partition? No. > I have a half-baked patch Me too. (Not half-baked but brewed.) In principle the change is trivial, but there are a few IDE issues that are presently solved in a very low-level way (and incorrectly). This makes the patch larger than expected at first sight. Andries - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Martin Dalecki
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Andries . Brouwer
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Martin Dalecki
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Martin Dalecki
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Jeff Garzik
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Jens Axboe
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Martin Dalecki
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Andries . Brouwer
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Alexander Viro
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Andries . Brouwer
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Andries . Brouwer
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Andries . Brouwer
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Martin Dalecki
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Andries . Brouwer
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Alexander Viro
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Andries . Brouwer
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Andries . Brouwer
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Alan Cox
- Re: [PATCH] struct char_device Andries . Brouwer