From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make BH_Unwritten a first class bufferhead flag
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 22:54:02 +0000
Message-ID: <20070108225402.GA24787@infradead.org>
References: <20070108224932.GZ33919298@melbourne.sgi.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, hch@infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:47346 "EHLO
	pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S932184AbXAHWyE (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 8 Jan 2007 17:54:04 -0500
To: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20070108224932.GZ33919298@melbourne.sgi.com>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

this doesn't look like a full first class flag to me yet.  Don't
we need to check for buffer_unwritten in the places we're checking
for buffer_delay so we can stop setting buffer_delay for unwritten
buffers?