From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] Allow changing the RWH policy for a running array
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 10:38:02 -0500
Message-ID: <wrfjh96h5aqt.fsf@redhat.com>
References: <20161205153204.7343-1-artur.paszkiewicz@intel.com>
        <20161205153204.7343-7-artur.paszkiewicz@intel.com>
        <wrfjd1h69hbn.fsf@redhat.com>
        <5c74d40c-36c4-97ae-9a67-be533d6abfb1@intel.com>
        <wrfj1sxl870h.fsf@redhat.com>
        <e90fade8-b904-7834-880d-61e1634e5fed@intel.com>
        <wrfja8c96qo5.fsf@redhat.com>
        <c21e1560-ca0d-67c8-83ca-04d275698d8b@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <c21e1560-ca0d-67c8-83ca-04d275698d8b@intel.com> (Artur
        Paszkiewicz's message of "Tue, 6 Dec 2016 16:30:38 +0100")
Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Artur Paszkiewicz <artur.paszkiewicz@intel.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-raid.ids

Artur Paszkiewicz <artur.paszkiewicz@intel.com> writes:
> On 12/06/2016 04:08 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> Artur Paszkiewicz <artur.paszkiewicz@intel.com> writes:
>>> Sure, I can change that :) If you agree with the rest I'll just resend
>>> those two patches.
>> 
>> Yes, that would be perfect.
>
> OK, but just in case - if you are going to apply them maybe wait until
> Shaohua comments on the kernel patches. These mdadm patches won't be any
> good if the kernel part doesn't get accepted.

I can cope with that :) I was trying to get in sync as I felt I was
falling behind the last couple of weeks. If I drop the ball or miss it,
please feel free to throw heavy objects at me.

Cheers,
Jes