From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bob Peterson Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 12:40:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Cluster-devel] GFS2 pull request for this merge window delayed a couple days In-Reply-To: <625755365.25134593.1435330561219.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <241324676.25202305.1441730421287.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> List-Id: To: cluster-devel.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I just wanted to give everyone (especially Linus) a heads-up on this. I've been collecting patches for the GFS2 file system's for-next branch. The biggest change this time revolves around allowing GFS2 to use rhashtable for its glocks, providing far greater scalability. Since the patch was posted to cluster-devel, various people (especially Andreas G) posted a few small correction and cleanup patches. Rather than giving Linus a big pile of messy patches, I opted to combine them into one proper patch (doing things "the right way") plus the other five patches I had already queued. Unfortunately, this was all done just as Stephen Rothwell sent out his email not to push any more patches to linux-next, which left me in limbo. I asked Stephen his advice, and based on that, we decided to: 1. Push the "proper" patch set to for-next today. 2. Give linux-next two days to settle with the six new patches. 3. Then send the formal request to pull the patches for the merge window. I just wanted to let everyone know why our patch pull request is delayed. BTW, this six-patch set has already been posted to cluster-devel for review and been signed off last Wednesday. All of them are pretty much confined to GFS2 (except for new calls to rhashtable functions) so hopefully this is just a formality. Sorry for the delay. Regards, Bob Peterson GFS2 Maintainer From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755156AbbIHQkZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2015 12:40:25 -0400 Received: from mx5-phx2.redhat.com ([209.132.183.37]:46192 "EHLO mx5-phx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754603AbbIHQkX (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2015 12:40:23 -0400 Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 12:40:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Bob Peterson To: torvalds@linux-foundation.org Cc: cluster-devel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <241324676.25202305.1441730421287.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <625755365.25134593.1435330561219.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Subject: GFS2 pull request for this merge window delayed a couple days MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.3.113.53] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.6_GA_5922 (ZimbraWebClient - FF40 (Linux)/8.0.6_GA_5922) Thread-Topic: GFS2 pull request for this merge window delayed a couple days Thread-Index: EPoXZhBTLuyFACY8FlpU8pI0taOE5g== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, I just wanted to give everyone (especially Linus) a heads-up on this. I've been collecting patches for the GFS2 file system's for-next branch. The biggest change this time revolves around allowing GFS2 to use rhashtable for its glocks, providing far greater scalability. Since the patch was posted to cluster-devel, various people (especially Andreas G) posted a few small correction and cleanup patches. Rather than giving Linus a big pile of messy patches, I opted to combine them into one proper patch (doing things "the right way") plus the other five patches I had already queued. Unfortunately, this was all done just as Stephen Rothwell sent out his email not to push any more patches to linux-next, which left me in limbo. I asked Stephen his advice, and based on that, we decided to: 1. Push the "proper" patch set to for-next today. 2. Give linux-next two days to settle with the six new patches. 3. Then send the formal request to pull the patches for the merge window. I just wanted to let everyone know why our patch pull request is delayed. BTW, this six-patch set has already been posted to cluster-devel for review and been signed off last Wednesday. All of them are pretty much confined to GFS2 (except for new calls to rhashtable functions) so hopefully this is just a formality. Sorry for the delay. Regards, Bob Peterson GFS2 Maintainer