From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <365e0b2b-06b1-dc0b-a9ae-dc901ca98d6a@fb.com> References: <1481914491-21456-1-git-send-email-sbates@raithlin.com> <365e0b2b-06b1-dc0b-a9ae-dc901ca98d6a@fb.com> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 13:37:46 -0600 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] nvme: Improvements in sysfs entry for NVMe CMBs From: "Stephen Bates" To: "Jens Axboe" MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: sagi@grimberg.me, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, james_p_freyensee@linux.intel.com, jonathan.derrick@intel.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: "Linux-nvme" Errors-To: linux-nvme-bounces+axboe=kernel.dk@lists.infradead.org List-ID: >> Jens I based this off v4.9 because for some reason your for-4.10/block >> is missing my original CMB commit (202021c1a63c6)? > > for-4.10/block was forked off v4.9-rc1, and that patch didn't make it in > until v4.9-rc2. Since for-4.10/block has been merged, any patches for this > series or next should be based on my for-linus, or just master. > > Assuming these two apply directly to master as well? > > Ah thanks for clearing up my confusion ;-). Yes, this series applies cleanly to both your master and for-linus branches. Stephen _______________________________________________ Linux-nvme mailing list Linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme