From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752032AbWCBSKJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Mar 2006 13:10:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752031AbWCBSKJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Mar 2006 13:10:09 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:4556 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752029AbWCBSKH (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Mar 2006 13:10:07 -0500 Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:08:38 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: David Howells Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, torvalds@osdl.org, steved@redhat.com, trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no, aviro@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cachefs@redhat.com, nfsv4@linux-nfs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Permit NFS superblock sharing [try #2] Message-Id: <20060302100838.63bc8741.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <13560.1141322238@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> References: <20060302092854.2818e98c.akpm@osdl.org> <20060301162113.774d1745.akpm@osdl.org> <20060301173617.16639.83553.stgit@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> <3718.1141299945@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> <13560.1141322238@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org David Howells wrote: > > > nfs-apply-mount-root-dentry-override-to-filesystems: > > 3 out of 10 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/nfs/inode.c.rej > > Would it help you if I split the NFS bits out of patch 2 into a separate patch? I wouldn't worry about splitting patches to make their application easier - the main thing is to ensure that they're logical units from the design/implementation POV. And that the kernel should compile (and hopefully run) at each stage of the series. And don't worry about the -mm-only patches - I'll sort them out. Unless people are working against functionality which is only in -mm, they should work against mainline. But in the case where you're hitting hard on a particular subsystem, the best tree to work against is that subsystem's tree. Which is a bit of a pain if you want to put your feature out to external testers, because then you need to also make a snapshot of the subsystem tree available as well. That's just a cost of doing business, really. It ends up being extremely simple if one is using quilt. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Permit NFS superblock sharing [try #2] Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:08:38 -0800 Message-ID: <20060302100838.63bc8741.akpm@osdl.org> References: <20060302092854.2818e98c.akpm@osdl.org> <20060301162113.774d1745.akpm@osdl.org> <20060301173617.16639.83553.stgit@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> <3718.1141299945@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> <13560.1141322238@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: aviro@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nfsv4@linux-nfs.org, steved@redhat.com, dhowells@redhat.com, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-cachefs@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: David Howells In-Reply-To: <13560.1141322238@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfsv4-bounces@linux-nfs.org Errors-To: nfsv4-bounces@linux-nfs.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org David Howells wrote: > > > nfs-apply-mount-root-dentry-override-to-filesystems: > > 3 out of 10 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/nfs/inode.c.rej > > Would it help you if I split the NFS bits out of patch 2 into a separate patch? I wouldn't worry about splitting patches to make their application easier - the main thing is to ensure that they're logical units from the design/implementation POV. And that the kernel should compile (and hopefully run) at each stage of the series. And don't worry about the -mm-only patches - I'll sort them out. Unless people are working against functionality which is only in -mm, they should work against mainline. But in the case where you're hitting hard on a particular subsystem, the best tree to work against is that subsystem's tree. Which is a bit of a pain if you want to put your feature out to external testers, because then you need to also make a snapshot of the subsystem tree available as well. That's just a cost of doing business, really. It ends up being extremely simple if one is using quilt.