[PATCH 00/11] Various cleanups and minor fixes · <hidden> · 2012-03-20
[PATCH 01/11] super1.c don't keep recalculating bitmap pointer · <hidden> · 2012-03-20
[PATCH 02/11] Define and use SUPER1_SIZE for allocations · <hidden> · 2012-03-20
[PATCH 03/11] init_super1() memset full buffer allocated for superblock · <hidden> · 2012-03-20
[PATCH 04/11] match_metadata_desc1(): Use calloc instead of malloc+memset · <hidden> · 2012-03-20
[PATCH 05/11] Use 4K buffer alignment for superblock allocations · <hidden> · 2012-03-20
[PATCH 06/11] Use struct align_fd to cache fd's block size for aligned reads/writes · <hidden> · 2012-03-20
[PATCH 07/11] match_metadata_desc0(): Use calloc instead of malloc+memset · <hidden> · 2012-03-20
[PATCH 08/11] Generalize ROUND_UP() macro and introduce matching ROUND_UP_PTR() · <hidden> · 2012-03-20
[PATCH 09/11] super1.c: use ROUND_UP/ROUND_UP_PTR · <hidden> · 2012-03-20
[PATCH 10/11] super-intel.c: Use ROUND_UP() instead of manually coding it · <hidden> · 2012-03-20
[PATCH 11/11] __write_init_super_ddf(): Use posix_memalign() instead of static aligned buffer · <hidden> · 2012-03-20
Re: [PATCH 00/11] Various cleanups and minor fixes · NeilBrown <hidden> · 2012-03-20
Re: [PATCH 00/11] Various cleanups and minor fixes · Jes Sorensen <hidden> · 2012-03-21

Re: [PATCH 00/11] Various cleanups and minor fixes

From: Jes Sorensen <hidden>
Date: 2012-03-21 07:58:09

On 03/20/12 22:11, NeilBrown wrote:

On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 17:54:05 +0100 Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com wrote:

quoted

From: Jes Sorensen <redacted>
This patch set implements a number of smaller cleanups, as well as
fixing a couple of cases where we don't zero out the full buffer we
just obtained via malloc.

All applied and push out - thanks.  There were a few conflict which some
stuff I was working on, but nothing serious.

Excellent, thanks!

quoted

The most controversial is probably patch 06 which caches the device
block size for aligned read/writes in super1.c to avoid calling the
ioctl() on each write.

Yeah, it's a bit ugly, but seems reasonable.

Yeah, I was trying to find the cleanest way of doing it. I am
contemplating whether it makes sense to try and push this up the stack,
but I figured starting out small like this would be better.

I think it might be nearly time for 3.2.4.  Do you have any thoughts about
that?

I think it would be a good time - I have found it relatively quiet on
the bug report front since the 3.2.3 update, so jumping to 3.2.4 sounds
good.

Cheers,
Jes

`h`	back out one level
`j`	next message in thread
`k`	previous message in thread
`l`	drill in
`Esc`	close help / fold thread tree
`?`	toggle this help