From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Howells Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Permit filesystem local caching and NFS superblock sharing [try #13] Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2006 14:08:34 +0100 Message-ID: <9534.1157116114@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> References: <20060831102127.8fb9a24b.akpm@osdl.org> <20060830135503.98f57ff3.akpm@osdl.org> <20060830125239.6504d71a.akpm@osdl.org> <20060830193153.12446.24095.stgit@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> <27414.1156970238@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> <9849.1157018310@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> Reply-To: Linux filesystem caching discussion list Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nfsv4@linux-nfs.org, trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-cachefs@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20060831102127.8fb9a24b.akpm@osdl.org> To: Andrew Morton List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-cachefs-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-cachefs-bounces@redhat.com List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton wrote: > Your CONFIG_BLOCK patches did a decent job of trashing your > fs-cache-make-kafs-* patches, btw. What's up with that? OK, it's sensible > for people to work against mainline but the net effect of doing that is to > create a mess for other people to clean up. It seems the only problem in my patches is that the file address space operations have had the sync_pages op removed in a patch in the disable-block-layer patchset as it's no longer necessary. However, as I suspect you're applying the block patches *before* the FS-Cache patches, I can't give you an incremental patch that you can apply after the other fs-cache-make-kafs-* patches, since you need to modify the first patch (fs-cache-make-kafs-use-fs-cache.patch) to get it to apply at all now. So, I could issue a revised AFS+FS-Cache patch, would that do? Or would you rather have a patch that you can apply to the one you already have directly and modify it in place? David