On 06/01/15 18:43, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 03:34:07PM +0300, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
Though pls consider my patch v3, it avoids allocation of 16 Mb here and
uses only 1 Mb of memory.
Once your patch has Reviewed-by: it will show up on my radar for merge.
If you and Peter need a 2nd opinion in your discussions about the
fallocate series, I can look at the series in more detail myself. Just
let me know.
Stefan
Fallocate stuff has been reviewed by Fam and I have enough
feedback at the moment to start rework. He wants some
simplifications at the moment. This is not a big deal.
This patch is technically correct and solves the problem
I have spotted. Thus it could be merged. I'll drop patch 1
in my series for the sake of this one to avoid unnecessary
discussion with it.
On the other hand I believe that my patch is a little bit
better, it allocates only 1 MB instead of 16 here. Though
I could rebase it and send it separately on top of this
to discuss it independently.
By the way, Stefan, do you see Acked-by: tag in your radar
or it should be avoided? We are using it as review signature
thanks to my prior Linux kernel experience.
Regards,
Den
