On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 12:33:18AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > > > I disagree - given the problem it is resolving leads to silent
> > > > > > filesystem corruption, this patch should be considered somewhat of a
> > > > > > priority to push...
> > > > >
> > > > > Umm. Ok, I forgot
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 12:33:18AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
I disagree - given the problem it is resolving leads to silent
filesystem corruption, this patch should be considered somewhat of a
priority to push...
Umm. Ok, I forgot what it does, really.
Hi!
> > > > > I disagree - given the problem it is resolving leads to silent
> > > > > filesystem corruption, this patch should be considered somewhat of a
> > > > > priority to push...
> > > >
> > > > Umm. Ok, I forgot what it does, really.
> > >
> > > It ensures that the filesystem is in an
Hi!
I disagree - given the problem it is resolving leads to silent
filesystem corruption, this patch should be considered somewhat of a
priority to push...
Umm. Ok, I forgot what it does, really.
It ensures that the filesystem is in an quiescent state both in
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 03:08:42PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > I disagree - given the problem it is resolving leads to silent
> > > > filesystem corruption, this patch should be considered somewhat of a
> > > > priority to push...
> > >
> > > Umm. Ok, I forgot what it does, really.
> >
>
On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 07:31:59 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 08:00:55 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
> >> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Tuesday, December 17, 2013
> > > I disagree - given the problem it is resolving leads to silent
> > > filesystem corruption, this patch should be considered somewhat of a
> > > priority to push...
> >
> > Umm. Ok, I forgot what it does, really.
>
> It ensures that the filesystem is in an quiescent state both in
> memory
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 01:01:28AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2013-12-18 10:31:52, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:08:43AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > > >>> Did this patch ever wind up going anywhere? Fedora has it sitting
> > > > >>> in
> > > >
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 08:00:55 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki
>> wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 11:04:46 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Josh
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@rjwysocki.net wrote:
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 08:00:55 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@rjwysocki.net
wrote:
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 11:04:46 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17,
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 01:01:28AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Wed 2013-12-18 10:31:52, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:08:43AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
Did this patch ever wind up going anywhere? Fedora has it sitting
in
our tree with a comment
I disagree - given the problem it is resolving leads to silent
filesystem corruption, this patch should be considered somewhat of a
priority to push...
Umm. Ok, I forgot what it does, really.
It ensures that the filesystem is in an quiescent state both in
memory and on disk, and
On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 07:31:59 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@rjwysocki.net wrote:
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 08:00:55 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@rjwysocki.net
wrote:
On Tuesday,
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 03:08:42PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
I disagree - given the problem it is resolving leads to silent
filesystem corruption, this patch should be considered somewhat of a
priority to push...
Umm. Ok, I forgot what it does, really.
It ensures that the
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 08:00:55 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 11:04:46 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
> >> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Josh Boyer
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Rafael J.
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 11:04:46 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Josh Boyer
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> >> On Friday, May 25, 2012, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 11:04:46 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Josh Boyer
> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> On Friday, May 25, 2012, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
On Wed 2013-12-18 10:31:52, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:08:43AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > > >>> Did this patch ever wind up going anywhere? Fedora has it sitting in
> > > >>> our tree with a comment that says "rebase" and I don't see it in the
> > > >>>
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:08:43AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > >>> Did this patch ever wind up going anywhere? Fedora has it sitting in
> > >>> our tree with a comment that says "rebase" and I don't see it in the
> > >>> linux-next tree at all.
> > >>>
> > >>> Did if fall through the
Hi!
> >>> Did this patch ever wind up going anywhere? Fedora has it sitting in
> >>> our tree with a comment that says "rebase" and I don't see it in the
> >>> linux-next tree at all.
> >>>
> >>> Did if fall through the cracks or was it NAKed somewhere?
> >>
> >> No, it wasn't in principle.
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Friday, May 25, 2012, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> >> commit b94887bbc0621e1e8402e7f0ec4bc3adf46c9a6e
>>> >> Author:
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, May 25, 2012, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> >> commit b94887bbc0621e1e8402e7f0ec4bc3adf46c9a6e
>> >> Author: Rafael J. Wysocki
>> >> Date: Fri Feb 17 12:42:08 2012 -0500
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
On Friday, May 25, 2012, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
commit b94887bbc0621e1e8402e7f0ec4bc3adf46c9a6e
Author: Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl
Date: Fri Feb 17
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
On Friday, May 25, 2012, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
commit
Hi!
Did this patch ever wind up going anywhere? Fedora has it sitting in
our tree with a comment that says rebase and I don't see it in the
linux-next tree at all.
Did if fall through the cracks or was it NAKed somewhere?
No, it wasn't in principle. There were some comments I
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:08:43AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
Did this patch ever wind up going anywhere? Fedora has it sitting in
our tree with a comment that says rebase and I don't see it in the
linux-next tree at all.
Did if fall through the cracks or was it NAKed
On Wed 2013-12-18 10:31:52, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:08:43AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
Did this patch ever wind up going anywhere? Fedora has it sitting in
our tree with a comment that says rebase and I don't see it in the
linux-next tree at all.
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 11:04:46 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org
wrote:
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
On Friday, May 25, 2012, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:59 PM,
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@rjwysocki.net wrote:
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 11:04:46 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org
wrote:
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
On
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 08:00:55 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@rjwysocki.net wrote:
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 11:04:46 AM Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org
wrote:
On Fri, May
30 matches
Mail list logo
