From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] writeback: get rid of generic_sync_sb_inodes()
 export
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:52:30 +0300
Message-ID: <1252407150.5060.51.camel@localhost>
References: <1252401791-22463-1-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com>
	 <1252401791-22463-2-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com>
	 <4AA631AA.6000803@gmail.com>  <20090908104111.GS18599@kernel.dk>
Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	chris.mason@oracle.com, david@fromorbit.com, hch@infradead.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, jack@suse.cz
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner+glk-linux-kernel-3=40m.gmane.org-S1754432AbZIHKye@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090908104111.GS18599@kernel.dk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 12:41 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08 2009, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > Hi Jens,
> >
> > On 09/08/2009 12:23 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>   	int i, err;
> >>   	struct ubifs_info *c =3D sb->s_fs_info;
> >> -	struct writeback_control wbc =3D {
> >> -		.sync_mode   =3D WB_SYNC_ALL,
> >> -		.range_start =3D 0,
> >> -		.range_end   =3D LLONG_MAX,
> >> -		.nr_to_write =3D LONG_MAX,
> >> -	};
> >>
> >>   	/*
> >>   	 * Zero @wait is just an advisory thing to help the file system=
 shove
> >> @@ -462,7 +456,7 @@ static int ubifs_sync_fs(struct super_block *s=
b, int wait)
> >>   	 * the user be able to get more accurate results of 'statfs()' =
after
> >>   	 * they synchronize the file system.
> >>   	 */
> >> -	generic_sync_sb_inodes(sb,&wbc);
> >> +	sync_inodes_sb(sb);
> >
> > This call is unnecessary and I've removed it and the patch is sitti=
ng in
> > linux-next for long time:
> > http://git.infradead.org/ubifs-2.6.git/commit/887ee17117fd23e962332=
b353d250ac9e090b20f
> >
> > Stephen e-mailed about the conflict recently. Could we please resol=
ve the
> > conflict? I guess if you pick up my patch then git will be able to =
resolve
> > stuff automatically.
>=20
> Would seem weird for me to carry your patch. As the issue is resolved=
 in
> -next, I'd say we just let whomever gets to merge last resolve it at
> their end.

That's Linus. Do you think it is nice to send him a pull request which
for sure requires requires manual work?

But well, if you do not want to carry my patch, then I'll have to
re-base my tree later, fix stuff, and send a pull request. I mean,
your stuff will for sure be merged first, because I send pull requests
late, just because UBIFS is a minor thing in the kernel.

:-(

--=20
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (=D0=90=D1=80=D1=82=D1=91=D0=BC =D0=91=D0=B8=D1=82=D1=8E=
=D1=86=D0=BA=D0=B8=D0=B9)