On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch(a)lst.de> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:12:40AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> Is that an acked-by for this cycle with a request to go deeper for 4.3?
I wouldn't really expect something this wide reaching to be picked up
for this cycle, but if you manage to get it in:
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch(a)lst.de>
Thanks, definitely a long shot at this point, but this is what one
gets for fixing rather than working around broken base infrastructure.
It would be unfortunate if we went another cycle with pmem having both
poor performance and broken persistence guarantees.