On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 11:28:32 +1000
NeilBrown wrote:
> This set includes acked-by's from Andrew and Peter so it should be
> OK for all five patches to go upstream through the NFS tree.
>
> I split the congestion tracking patch out from the wait-for-PG_private
> patch as they are conceptually
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 11:28:32 +1000
NeilBrown ne...@suse.de wrote:
This set includes acked-by's from Andrew and Peter so it should be
OK for all five patches to go upstream through the NFS tree.
I split the congestion tracking patch out from the wait-for-PG_private
patch as they are
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:28 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
> This set includes acked-by's from Andrew and Peter so it should be
> OK for all five patches to go upstream through the NFS tree.
>
> I split the congestion tracking patch out from the wait-for-PG_private
> patch as they are conceptually
This set includes acked-by's from Andrew and Peter so it should be
OK for all five patches to go upstream through the NFS tree.
I split the congestion tracking patch out from the wait-for-PG_private
patch as they are conceptually separate.
This set continues to perform well in my tests and
This set includes acked-by's from Andrew and Peter so it should be
OK for all five patches to go upstream through the NFS tree.
I split the congestion tracking patch out from the wait-for-PG_private
patch as they are conceptually separate.
This set continues to perform well in my tests and
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:28 PM, NeilBrown ne...@suse.de wrote:
This set includes acked-by's from Andrew and Peter so it should be
OK for all five patches to go upstream through the NFS tree.
I split the congestion tracking patch out from the wait-for-PG_private
patch as they are conceptually
6 matches
Mail list logo