From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail190.messagelabs.com (mail190.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ECA366B01F0 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 21:07:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.71]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id o7V17Yks022564 for (envelope-from kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com); Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:07:34 +0900 Received: from smail (m1 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60CF045DE50 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:07:34 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.91]) by m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CAE245DE4E for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:07:34 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2557A1DB804B for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:07:34 +0900 (JST) Received: from m106.s.css.fujitsu.com (m106.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.106]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF9071DB8047 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:07:33 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] writeback: Reporting dirty thresholds in /proc/vmstat In-Reply-To: References: <20100830092446.524B.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-Id: <20100831095932.87CD.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:07:32 +0900 (JST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Michael Rubin Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, fengguang.wu@intel.com, jack@suse.cz, riel@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@fromorbit.com, npiggin@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de, axboe@kernel.dk List-ID: > On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 5:28 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro > wrote: > > afaict, you and wu agreed /debug/bdi/default/stats is enough good. > > why do you change your mention? > > I commented on this in the 0/4 email of the bug. I think these belong > in /proc/vmstat but I saw they exist in /debug/bdi/default/stats. I > figure they will probably not be accepted but I thought it was worth > attaching for consideration of upgrading from debugfs to /proc. For reviewers view, we are reviewing your patch to merge immediately if all issue are fixed. Then, I'm unhappy if you don't drop merge blocker item even though you merely want asking. At least, you can make separate thread, no? Of cource, wen other user also want to expose via /proc interface, we are resume this discusstion gradly. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org