From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>,
Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] first block round for 2.6.31
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:26:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090611182657.GY11363@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0906111105021.3573@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, Jun 11 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >
> > This is the bulk of the block changes for 2.6.31, please pull.
> >
> > git://git.kernel.dk/linux-2.6-block.git for-2.6.31
>
> Ok, this clashed pretty badly with both the tracing tree (which obviously
> has block tracers) and with my pull ide pull from Bartlomiej (which
> obviously has ide driver changes).
>
> I fixed everything up, and it _looks_ ok, including a "allyesconfig" build
> etc. It wasn't totally trivial, though - in the sense that it's entirely
> possible that I fixed something up incorrectly. Also, in the tracer code,
> I kept the checks for whether something is a "pc" of "fs" request, so it
> now looks like
>
> __entry->sector = blk_pc_request(rq) ? 0 : blk_rq_pos(rq);
>
> and I suspect that it could just be an unconditional
>
> __entry->sector = blk_rq_pos(rq);
>
> instead, but somebody involved with the whole block tracing thing needs to
> check that out.
>
> The ide-tape.c changes also need some expert tender loving checks. I
> neither know the code, nor have the hardware to check my fixups. Almost
> all the changes are actually by the same person - it's almost all Tejun's
> code (and mostly the same patches), just coming in through two different
> trees. Not very nice.
I agree, that part is a mess. Hopefully we wont have this degree of
churn in this area again, but I do wish that we had more block consumers
based off the block tree. Having cross-dependent stuff in different
trees just gets messy quickly. Thanks for resolving it though, the IDE
code wasn't pulled in when I sent the pull request or I would've done it
myself. I usually try to make sure that it merges cleanly with your head
of tree before sending it out.
> Btw, Jens: in your tree, you've committed Tejun's changes without adding
> your own sign-off. Not good!
That's for the patches that I pulled from his git tree. It should list
him as committer too.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-11 18:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-11 11:13 [GIT PULL] first block round for 2.6.31 Jens Axboe
2009-06-11 18:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-11 18:26 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2009-06-11 18:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-11 18:52 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-11 19:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-11 20:04 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-11 19:58 ` Diego Calleja
2009-06-11 20:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-12 6:48 ` Borislav Petkov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090611182657.GY11363@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=srostedt@redhat.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.