From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Martin K. Petersen" Subject: Re: Block/SCSI data integrity update v2 Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 12:33:03 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1406320469-29352-1-git-send-email-martin.petersen@oracle.com> <20140726162307.GA19441@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:46535 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751475AbaGZQde (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2014 12:33:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20140726162307.GA19441@infradead.org> (Christoph Hellwig's message of "Sat, 26 Jul 2014 09:23:07 -0700") Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe , James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com >>>>> "Christoph" == Christoph Hellwig writes: Christoph> How should we pull it in? Normally block stuff should go Christoph> through Jens, but the sd changes won't apply without the Christoph> various patches in the scsi tree. Typically Jens and James stagger their merges when we do this. But it would definitely be easier to just pull everything through SCSI. Except for the tweak in blk-merge.c I don't touch anything that would interfere with block code outside of the data integrity files. Jens, what do you think? -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering