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=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 2A064C433DF for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 13:35:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DE372083B for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 13:35:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731128AbgFSNft (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jun 2020 09:35:49 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:53645 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730512AbgFSNft (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jun 2020 09:35:49 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 3F8F568AFE; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:35:47 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:35:46 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Brian Foster Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: kill of struct xfs_icdinode Message-ID: <20200619133546.GA27997@lst.de> References: <20200524091757.128995-1-hch@lst.de> <20200601125635.GA2043@bfoster> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200601125635.GA2043@bfoster> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 08:56:35AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:17:43AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > this series finally remove struct xfs_icdinode, which contained > > the leftovers of the on-disk inode in the in-core inode by moving > > the fields into struct xfs_inode itself. > > > > JFYI, this series doesn't apply to for-next.. It was based on for-next back when I did it, but it seems the quota series from Eric was merged since then.