From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id n4BKBPSa011504 for ; Mon, 11 May 2009 15:11:27 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 0341EF8FCE4 for ; Mon, 11 May 2009 13:16:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id NMB0lmTIkkZSREHh for ; Mon, 11 May 2009 13:16:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 16:11:27 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] xfs: cleanup ->sync_fs Message-ID: <20090511201126.GA14195@infradead.org> References: <20090426140305.113371000@bombadil.infradead.org> <20090426140707.713299000@bombadil.infradead.org> <4A07141A.5060303@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A07141A.5060303@sandeen.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Sandeen Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 12:51:22PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Is it worth keeping a comment about this still being similar to the > freeze path? (xfs_quiesce_data) Don't think so. The commonality is in xfs_quiesce_data, and both calling this functions for the majority of the work makes that quite obvious. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs