From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] support appending AIO writes Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 13:55:28 +0000 Message-ID: <20140205135528.GN10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20140204172402.380571745@bombadil.infradead.org> <20140204222901.GE13997@dastard> <20140205065728.GA30899@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Sergey Meirovich , xfs@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140205065728.GA30899@infradead.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 10:57:28PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 09:29:01AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > The patches look sane. Does the dio change conflict with the > > work Al is doing right now of the direct IO path, or will > > marshalling that part of the change through the XFS tree be fine? > > I've not seen any changes in that area in Al's trees. That being said > I don't think this little flag should cause any major problems as we'll > have to pass the flags argument in some form of direct I/O method for > all the other quirks we have. Shouldn't be a problem; there might be textual conflicts, but seeing that XFS tree is much less likely to be rebased, I can just pull from it once it gets to those. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs