Re: merging the per-bdi writeback patchset

[Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>]

On Tue, Jun 23 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 01:12:10PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > Last time we discussed this you said you're happy with 2.6.32.  I really
> > > want to take a more detailed look and put that on the not so urgent list
> > > because ou didn't seem to rush for .31.  So my vote goes for waiting a
> > > bit longer.
> > 
> > Yeah, 2.6.32 works for me too, .31 would have been nice though so I
> > don't have to carry it around anymore. But either is fine, if you and
> > Andrew want more time to review this stuff, then lets just settle for
> > .32.
> 
> Yes, I'd really prefer more time.  I also expect to come up with some
> more changes in that area.  Your patch makes the differences between
> kupdate and pdflush-stye writeback look even more ugly then it already
> is, so I want to see i there's some nicer way to handle it.  I also want

Good point, should be easy enough to fold the two together.

> to take a look if it makes sense to distangle data integrity and
> background writeback somehow.

That one is also on more list, would make the code flow a lot cleaner I
suspect.

-- 
Jens Axboe