On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 07:27:30PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
I was wondering about that; couldn't tell if the split in the code
was historical, or being intentionally maintained.
I tested the patch, it worked great. It also seemed to recover
much more quickly -- so quickly, in fact, that I thought something
had gone wrong.
I reviewed it one more time, it really does look good. A formal
submission and acked by's at earliest convenience would be good.
--linas
-