diff for duplicates of <1493412156.2767.21.camel@sandisk.com> diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt index ddbaba9..7b48adc 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N1/1.txt @@ -4,50 +4,58 @@ On Fri, 2017-04-28 at 16:23 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > > On Wed, 2017-04-26 at 09:40 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > this series has some prep patches for my work to have proper, type > > > > checked block errors codes. One fallout of that is that we need to -> > > > get rid of how dm overloads a few return values with either internal +> > > > get rid of how dm overloads a few return values with either interna= +l > > > > positive error codes or negative errno values. This patches does > > > > that, which happens to clean things up a bit, and also allows us -> > > > dm to propagate the actual error code in one case where it currently +> > > > dm to propagate the actual error code in one case where it currentl= +y > > > > is dropped on the floor. -> > > +> > >=20 > > > Hello Christoph, -> > > -> > > Some patches in this series conflict with patches I would like to end up in -> > > the stable kernel series. If I would rebase my patch series on top of your -> > > series then that would make it harder to apply my patches on the stable +> > >=20 +> > > Some patches in this series conflict with patches I would like to end= + up in +> > > the stable kernel series. If I would rebase my patch series on top of= + your +> > > series then that would make it harder to apply my patches on the stab= +le > > > kernel trees. Mike and Christoph, please advise how to proceed. -> > -> > Bugfixes always go before cleanups. I'd be happy to delay and/or rebase +> >=20 +> > Bugfixes always go before cleanups. I'd be happy to delay and/or rebas= +e > > any of my patches as needed. -> +>=20 > I rebased your patchset ontop of Bart's patchset that I've already > staged in linux-dm.git's 'dm-4.12' branch. -> +>=20 > When I try to apply this rebased patchset, it turns out 'dm-4.12' is > missing linux-block.git commit 8fc779805 ("dm mpath: don't check for > req->errors"). Because of this your first patch ("dm mpath: merge > do_end_io into multipath_end_io") won't apply due to conflict. -> +>=20 > Not sure how we skin this cat. Unfortunately Jens cannot easily pick > this rebased patchset up because he'll be missing all of Bart's changes > that I've staged in linux-dm.git's 'dm-4.12'. -> +>=20 > In hindsight, linux-block.git commit 8fc779805 likely should've been > routed through linux-dm.git. But not a big deal. -> +>=20 > How should we skin this cat of getting your changes into 4.12? I could > send a 2nd pull request to Linus after both linux-block.git and > linux-dm.git are merged... sound OK? -> +>=20 > Until then, and/or for now, I've staged the fully merged result in > linux-next via linux-dm.git's 'for-next', see: -> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/device-mapper/linux-dm.git/log/?h=for-next +> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/device-mapper/linux-dm.gi= +t/log/?h=3Dfor-next Hello Mike, A few days ago Linus wrote that he is OK with occasional cherry-picking of patches to resolve scenarios like the one described above (see also -https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/14/484). How about cherry-picking the necessary +https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/14/484). How about cherry-picking the necessar= +y commit(s) from Jens' tree into the dm for-next branch? -Bart. +Bart.= diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest index a9e7d72..b628469 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N1/content_digest @@ -18,52 +18,60 @@ "> > > On Wed, 2017-04-26 at 09:40 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:\n" "> > > > this series has some prep patches for my work to have proper, type\n" "> > > > checked block errors codes. One fallout of that is that we need to\n" - "> > > > get rid of how dm overloads a few return values with either internal\n" + "> > > > get rid of how dm overloads a few return values with either interna=\n" + "l\n" "> > > > positive error codes or negative errno values. This patches does\n" "> > > > that, which happens to clean things up a bit, and also allows us\n" - "> > > > dm to propagate the actual error code in one case where it currently\n" + "> > > > dm to propagate the actual error code in one case where it currentl=\n" + "y\n" "> > > > is dropped on the floor.\n" - "> > > \n" + "> > >=20\n" "> > > Hello Christoph,\n" - "> > > \n" - "> > > Some patches in this series conflict with patches I would like to end up in\n" - "> > > the stable kernel series. If I would rebase my patch series on top of your\n" - "> > > series then that would make it harder to apply my patches on the stable\n" + "> > >=20\n" + "> > > Some patches in this series conflict with patches I would like to end=\n" + " up in\n" + "> > > the stable kernel series. If I would rebase my patch series on top of=\n" + " your\n" + "> > > series then that would make it harder to apply my patches on the stab=\n" + "le\n" "> > > kernel trees. Mike and Christoph, please advise how to proceed.\n" - "> > \n" - "> > Bugfixes always go before cleanups. I'd be happy to delay and/or rebase\n" + "> >=20\n" + "> > Bugfixes always go before cleanups. I'd be happy to delay and/or rebas=\n" + "e\n" "> > any of my patches as needed.\n" - "> \n" + ">=20\n" "> I rebased your patchset ontop of Bart's patchset that I've already\n" "> staged in linux-dm.git's 'dm-4.12' branch.\n" - "> \n" + ">=20\n" "> When I try to apply this rebased patchset, it turns out 'dm-4.12' is\n" "> missing linux-block.git commit 8fc779805 (\"dm mpath: don't check for\n" "> req->errors\"). Because of this your first patch (\"dm mpath: merge\n" "> do_end_io into multipath_end_io\") won't apply due to conflict.\n" - "> \n" + ">=20\n" "> Not sure how we skin this cat. Unfortunately Jens cannot easily pick\n" "> this rebased patchset up because he'll be missing all of Bart's changes\n" "> that I've staged in linux-dm.git's 'dm-4.12'.\n" - "> \n" + ">=20\n" "> In hindsight, linux-block.git commit 8fc779805 likely should've been\n" "> routed through linux-dm.git. But not a big deal.\n" - "> \n" + ">=20\n" "> How should we skin this cat of getting your changes into 4.12? I could\n" "> send a 2nd pull request to Linus after both linux-block.git and\n" "> linux-dm.git are merged... sound OK?\n" - "> \n" + ">=20\n" "> Until then, and/or for now, I've staged the fully merged result in\n" "> linux-next via linux-dm.git's 'for-next', see:\n" - "> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/device-mapper/linux-dm.git/log/?h=for-next\n" + "> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/device-mapper/linux-dm.gi=\n" + "t/log/?h=3Dfor-next\n" "\n" "Hello Mike,\n" "\n" "A few days ago Linus wrote that he is OK with occasional cherry-picking of\n" "patches to resolve scenarios like the one described above (see also\n" - "https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/14/484). How about cherry-picking the necessary\n" + "https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/14/484). How about cherry-picking the necessar=\n" + "y\n" "commit(s) from Jens' tree into the dm for-next branch?\n" "\n" - Bart. + Bart.= -4d464f58f2c32def1e72efa36f03f36f559daef99ab5ac93b75c77ca1050c14e +fffc034c25fadcf7623725a9f0a3f8a497c8f61117fa271b250e9ed1947f6a12
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.