From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] VM/NFS: The VM must tell the filesystem when to free reclaimable pages Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2010 00:30:43 -0500 Message-ID: <1262842243.2185.47.camel@localhost> References: <20100106205110.22547.85345.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20100106205110.22547.81645.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20100107022903.GD9475@localhost> <1262839763.2185.25.camel@localhost> <20100107050307.GA19399@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Jan Kara , Steve Rago , "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" , "jens.axboe" , Peter Staubach , Arjan van de Ven , Ingo Molnar , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" To: Wu Fengguang Return-path: Received: from mx2.netapp.com ([216.240.18.37]:14784 "EHLO mx2.netapp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751345Ab0AGFkG convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jan 2010 00:40:06 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20100107050307.GA19399@localhost> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2010-01-07 at 13:03 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote: > "commit" could also be misread as "commit a transaction"? > Anyway I think adding an "nfs" limits the scope to NFS thus makes code > reading somehow easier. Just a personal feeling. How about 'force_commit_unstable' instead? That ties it up to the unstable writes rather than NFS. Cheers Trond