From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57007 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754814AbbDTJ2G (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Apr 2015 05:28:06 -0400 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <20150420144956.1f489f67@notabene.brown> References: <20150420144956.1f489f67@notabene.brown> <20150409174916.5a2efef5@notabene.brown> <29536.1428571388@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20150410112431.0e9c337d@notabene.brown> To: NeilBrown Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-cachefs@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] fscache/cachefiles versus btrfs MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 10:27:57 +0100 Message-ID: <31056.1429522077@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: NeilBrown wrote: > I managed to reproduce the bug, and when I applied your patches I cannot any > more. So it looks like you've fixed it - thanks. I hope so too. Now I just hope Linus takes the patches. > That just leave the bmap issue. I'll post a patch which causes lseek to be > used when the fs says that is OK. Okay, thanks. David