From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id oA8EGLpt102287 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 08:16:22 -0600 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 0966C161341 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 06:17:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id zfo2Ko0dCWekCeaO for ; Mon, 08 Nov 2010 06:17:48 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 09:17:46 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/16] xfs: current patch stack for 2.6.38 window Message-ID: <20101108141746.GA15588@infradead.org> References: <1289206519-18377-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1289206519-18377-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> 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: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 07:55:03PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > My tree is currently based on the VFS locking changes I have out for review, > so there's a couple fo patches that won't apply sanely to a mainline or OSS xfs > dev tree. See below for a pointer to a git tree with all the patches in it. The only think that should depend on it are the inode hash changes. I suspect it might be a better idea if we feed those via Al together with the VFS scalability bits, and only feed the rest through the XFS tree to avoid having nasty dependencies. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs