From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Permit filesystem local caching and
	NFS superblock sharing [try #13]
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:42:08 +0100
Message-ID: <11507.1157046128@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com>
References: <20060831102127.8fb9a24b.akpm@osdl.org>
	<20060830135503.98f57ff3.akpm@osdl.org>
	<20060830125239.6504d71a.akpm@osdl.org>
	<20060830193153.12446.24095.stgit@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com>
	<27414.1156970238@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com>
	<9849.1157018310@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com>
Reply-To: Linux filesystem caching discussion list <linux-cachefs@redhat.com>
Cc: nfsv4@linux-nfs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	torvalds@osdl.org, linux-cachefs@redhat.com,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <linux-cachefs-bounces@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20060831102127.8fb9a24b.akpm@osdl.org> 
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no,
	hch@infradead.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cachefs>,
	<mailto:linux-cachefs-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-cachefs>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-cachefs@redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-cachefs-request@redhat.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cachefs>,
	<mailto:linux-cachefs-request@redhat.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: linux-cachefs-bounces@redhat.com
Errors-To: linux-cachefs-bounces@redhat.com
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote:

> Trond merged the large nfs-affecting ones; I don't know if he intends to
> handle the non-nfs bulk of the work though.

There is one large NFS affecting patch left: namely the one that makes NFS use
FS-Cache.  I presume that requires Trond's agreement to merge.

> Your CONFIG_BLOCK patches did a decent job of trashing your
> fs-cache-make-kafs-* patches, btw.  What's up with that?  OK, it's sensible
> for people to work against mainline but the net effect of doing that is to
> create a mess for other people to clean up.

Hmmm...  Jens wanted my block patches against his tree; you wanted my NFS
patches against Trond's NFS tree.  I guess I should try stacking the whole
lot, but against what?  And who carries the fixes?  A patch to fix this
problem may well only apply to a tree that's the conjunction of both:-/

> If Christoph acks them then I can send them to Trond or Linus, at Trond's
> option.
> 
> Or I can butt out, drop the patches, wait for them to turn up in Trond's
> tree, at your option.

Trond, Christoph?  Any thoughts?


David