From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Howells Subject: Re: Pull request for FS-Cache, including NFS patches Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 15:04:35 +0000 Message-ID: <12273.1230563075@redhat.com> References: <20081228200726.7b7078b4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <8930.1229560221@redhat.com> <20081218142420.GA16728@infradead.org> <20081218123601.11810b7f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <200812190007.34581.bernd.schubert@fastmail.fm> <20081218152616.a24c013f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081219110539.7e7e230c.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20081229144533.4a0ab696.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Stephen Rothwell , Bernd Schubert , nfsv4@linux-nfs.org, hch@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, steved@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, rwheeler@redhat.com, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Trond Myklebust To: Andrew Morton Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:41817 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750822AbYL2PEs (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Dec 2008 10:04:48 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20081228200726.7b7078b4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Andrew Morton wrote: > And that of course means that many many 2.6.28 patches which I am > maintaining will need significant rework to apply on top of linux-next, > and then they won't apply to mainline. Or that linux-next will not apply > on top of those patches. Mainly memory management. Significant rework to many many patches? The FS-Cache patches don't have all that much impact outside of their own directories, AFS and NFS. > Please drop the NFS tree until after -rc1. > > Guys, this: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/12/27/173 Okay, that's a reasonable request. David