Hi,
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:19:09 -0500, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com wrote:
This has only btrfs as a module and would be the fastest way to see
the .c files. btrfs doesn't have any changes outside of fs/Makefile and
fs/Kconfig
I found some overlapping (or cloned) functions in
On Sat, 2009-01-03 at 01:37 +0900, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:19:09 -0500, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com
wrote:
This has only btrfs as a module and would be the fastest way to see
the .c files. btrfs doesn't have any changes outside of fs/Makefile and
On Fri, 2009-01-02 at 20:05 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com writes:
On Wed, 2008-12-31 at 10:45 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 06:28:55 -0500 Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com
wrote:
Hello everyone,
Hi!
I've done some testing
On Sat, 2009-01-03 at 01:37 +0900, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:19:09 -0500, Chris Mason chris.ma...@oracle.com
wrote:
This has only btrfs as a module and would be the fastest way to see
the .c files. btrfs doesn't have any changes outside of fs/Makefile and
On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 02:32:29PM -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
If combination spinlocks/mutexes are really a win they should be
in the generic mutex framework. And I'm still dubious on the hardcoded
numbers.
Sure, I'm happy to use a generic framework there (or help create one).
They are
On Fri, 2009-01-02 at 22:01 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 02:32:29PM -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
If combination spinlocks/mutexes are really a win they should be
in the generic mutex framework. And I'm still dubious on the hardcoded
numbers.
Sure, I'm happy to use
I don't disagree, please do keep in mind that I'm not suggesting anyone
use this in production yet.
When it's in mainline I suspect people will start using it for that.
I think the larger question here is where we want development to happen.
I'm definitely not pretending that
