From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [ATTEND] [LSF TOPIC] What to do about O_DIRECT?
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:01:28 -0500
Message-ID: <20130118230128.GA15758@thunk.org>
References: <20130118221007.GA2276@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
To: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from li9-11.members.linode.com ([67.18.176.11]:44211 "EHLO
	imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751070Ab3ARXBi (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:01:38 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130118221007.GA2276@localhost.localdomain>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

.... and can we get rid of this horrible hack where we have this
bastardized use of a struct buffer_head which is allocated on the
stack, which has nothing really to do with a buffer head, and is all
about the fact that no one wants to change the function signature for
get_block_t?

						- Ted