On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 01:30 -0500, Josef Sipek wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 04:55:49PM -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> > /*
> > * jfs_lock.h
> > @@ -42,6 +43,7 @@ do {
> > \
> > if (cond) \
> >
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 04:55:49PM -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
...
> diff -Nurp linux-2.6.20-rc4-mm1/fs/jfs/jfs_lock.h linux/fs/jfs/jfs_lock.h
> --- linux-2.6.20-rc4-mm1/fs/jfs/jfs_lock.h2006-11-29 15:57:37.0
> -0600
> +++ linux/fs/jfs/jfs_lock.h 2007-01-17 15:30:19.0 -0600
>
On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 10:46 +1100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 17 2007, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 10:18 +1100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >
> > > Can you try io_schedule() and verify that things just work?
> >
> > I actually did do that in the first place, but wondered if it was t
On Wed, Jan 17 2007, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 10:18 +1100, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> > Can you try io_schedule() and verify that things just work?
>
> I actually did do that in the first place, but wondered if it was the
> right thing to introduce the accounting changes that came
On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 10:18 +1100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Can you try io_schedule() and verify that things just work?
I actually did do that in the first place, but wondered if it was the
right thing to introduce the accounting changes that came with that.
I'll change it back to io_schedule() and te
On Wed, Jan 17 2007, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> Jens,
> Can you please take a look at this patch, and if you think it's sane,
> add it to your explicit i/o plugging patchset? Would it make sense in
> any of these paths to use io_schedule() instead of schedule()?
I'm glad you bring that up, actually.
Jens,
Can you please take a look at this patch, and if you think it's sane,
add it to your explicit i/o plugging patchset? Would it make sense in
any of these paths to use io_schedule() instead of schedule()?
I hadn't looked at your patchset until I discovered that jfs was easy to
hang in the -mm
7 matches
Mail list logo
