From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753578Ab3BEHPD (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2013 02:15:03 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41051 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750842Ab3BEHPA (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2013 02:15:00 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 08:14:51 +0100 (CET) From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Luk=E1=A8_Czerner?= X-X-Sender: lukas@localhost To: Andrew Morton cc: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Luk=E1=A8_Czerner?= , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/18] mm: teach truncate_inode_pages_range() to handle non page aligned ranges In-Reply-To: <20130204125136.b0926f20.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: References: <1359715424-32318-1-git-send-email-lczerner@redhat.com> <1359715424-32318-11-git-send-email-lczerner@redhat.com> <20130201151502.59398b29.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20130204125136.b0926f20.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="571107329-1464879651-1360048494=:3225" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --571107329-1464879651-1360048494=:3225 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Mon, 4 Feb 2013, Andrew Morton wrote: > Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 12:51:36 -0800 > From: Andrew Morton > To: LukᨠCzerner > Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, > linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, > xfs@oss.sgi.com, Hugh Dickins > Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/18] mm: teach truncate_inode_pages_range() to handle > non page aligned ranges > > On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 15:51:19 +0100 (CET) > Luk____ Czerner wrote: > > > I hope I explained myself well enough :). Are you ok with this king > > of approach ? If so, I'll resend the patch set without the > > initialisation-at-declaration. > > uh, maybe. Next time I'll apply the patch and look at the end result! > Try to make it as understandable and (hence) maintainable as possible, > OK? Agreed. Thanks! -Lukas --571107329-1464879651-1360048494=:3225--