From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Chinner Date: Wed, 1 May 2019 07:21:46 +1000 Subject: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v7 0/5] iomap and gfs2 fixes In-Reply-To: <20190430025028.GA5200@magnolia> References: <20190429220934.10415-1-agruenba@redhat.com> <20190430025028.GA5200@magnolia> Message-ID: <20190430212146.GL1454@dread.disaster.area> List-Id: To: cluster-devel.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 07:50:28PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 12:09:29AM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > > Here's another update of this patch queue, hopefully with all wrinkles > > ironed out now. > > > > Darrick, I think Linus would be unhappy seeing the first four patches in > > the gfs2 tree; could you put them into the xfs tree instead like we did > > some time ago already? > > Sure. When I'm done reviewing them I'll put them in the iomap tree, > though, since we now have a separate one. :) I'd just keep the iomap stuff in the xfs tree as a separate set of branches and merge them into the XFS for-next when composing it. That way it still gets plenty of test coverage from all the XFS devs and linux next without anyone having to think about. You really only need to send separate pull requests for the iomap and XFS branches - IMO, there's no really need to have a complete new tree for it... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david at fromorbit.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A523FC04AA8 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 21:21:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7892A21783 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2019 21:21:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726612AbfD3VVw (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Apr 2019 17:21:52 -0400 Received: from mail104.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.246]:50186 "EHLO mail104.syd.optusnet.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726328AbfD3VVw (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Apr 2019 17:21:52 -0400 Received: from dread.disaster.area (pa49-181-171-240.pa.nsw.optusnet.com.au [49.181.171.240]) by mail104.syd.optusnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77CA143A20F; Wed, 1 May 2019 07:21:48 +1000 (AEST) Received: from dave by dread.disaster.area with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1hLaCA-0004HS-TP; Wed, 01 May 2019 07:21:46 +1000 Date: Wed, 1 May 2019 07:21:46 +1000 From: Dave Chinner To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Andreas Gruenbacher , cluster-devel@redhat.com, Christoph Hellwig , Bob Peterson , Jan Kara , Ross Lagerwall , Mark Syms , Edwin =?iso-8859-1?B?VPZy9ms=?= , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/5] iomap and gfs2 fixes Message-ID: <20190430212146.GL1454@dread.disaster.area> References: <20190429220934.10415-1-agruenba@redhat.com> <20190430025028.GA5200@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190430025028.GA5200@magnolia> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Optus-CM-Score: 0 X-Optus-CM-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=UJetJGXy c=1 sm=1 tr=0 cx=a_idp_d a=LhzQONXuMOhFZtk4TmSJIw==:117 a=LhzQONXuMOhFZtk4TmSJIw==:17 a=jpOVt7BSZ2e4Z31A5e1TngXxSK0=:19 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=E5NmQfObTbMA:10 a=7-415B0cAAAA:8 a=JuDxSlhT3OO6blO4plAA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=biEYGPWJfzWAr4FL6Ov7:22 Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 07:50:28PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 12:09:29AM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > > Here's another update of this patch queue, hopefully with all wrinkles > > ironed out now. > > > > Darrick, I think Linus would be unhappy seeing the first four patches in > > the gfs2 tree; could you put them into the xfs tree instead like we did > > some time ago already? > > Sure. When I'm done reviewing them I'll put them in the iomap tree, > though, since we now have a separate one. :) I'd just keep the iomap stuff in the xfs tree as a separate set of branches and merge them into the XFS for-next when composing it. That way it still gets plenty of test coverage from all the XFS devs and linux next without anyone having to think about. You really only need to send separate pull requests for the iomap and XFS branches - IMO, there's no really need to have a complete new tree for it... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com