From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753245Ab1EWJ2m (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 05:28:42 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:30940 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751531Ab1EWJ2l (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2011 05:28:41 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 17:28:38 +0800 From: Wu Fengguang To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Andrew Morton , Jan Kara , Dave Chinner , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/18] writeback fixes and cleanups for 2.6.40 (v3) Message-ID: <20110523092838.GA25829@localhost> References: <20110519214530.939830917@intel.com> <20110523090739.GA27894@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110523090739.GA27894@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 05:07:39PM +0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Wu, Andrew, > > what's the plan for these for 2.6.40? We'll need to make some progress > in this area, and even if we can't get everything it we should make sure > to at least include the updated versions of those in -mm. But even > some of the later ones are pretty low risk. Yes, except for patch 14 which does not include external behavior changes besides the good full write chunk size for large files, the patches not in -mm are pretty trivial ones. Aside from my simple tests, Alex also helped going through the LKP tests with the patchset and find no writeback regressions. Thanks, Fengguang