On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 11:50:19AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 1:08 PM Matthew Wilcox <wi...@infradead.org> wrote: > < > > Please consider pulling the XArray patch set. > > Pulled.
Thanks! > I took the more recent version of yours, because by the time I > actually had time to review this thing for pulling, even the recent > version had been in linux-next for a week. > > Of course, I don't think linux-next has been updated, so it's all > moot, but the point is that I didn't get the feeling that it was all > some very recent code. > > I do like how the conversions look, with the code in some cases > notably simpler. And it looks like at least one of the conflicts > (fs/dax.c) was due to a bug-fix to the old code where your simpler > xarray replacement didn't have the problem. Yes, that's right. It turned out to be a problem for any multiorder radix tree user, and that was a consequence of how the radix tree API worked for multiorder entries. The XArray API just works better for multiorder entries. > NOTE! I did get some conflicts with other stuff, and while the > conflict resolution all looked pretty straightforward, this does want > looking at. > > Particularly the mm/workingset.c code. I've been rebasing the xarray-conv branch on your tree pretty regularly this week, so I have a fairly good idea how I think it should look. I'll check to see if you & I have the same thoughts when you push it out. > It's still undergoing my build tests to verify my merge, but that > should be completed soon. I'll do a basic boot test too due to the > core nature of these changes, but assuming it all passes I'll push > this out within the next 30 minutes and would appreciate people giving > it a second look for verification. Thank you.
