From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Permit filesystem local caching and NFS superblock sharing [try #13] Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 10:21:27 -0700 Message-ID: <20060831102127.8fb9a24b.akpm@osdl.org> References: <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 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nfsv4@linux-nfs.org, trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-cachefs@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: David Howells In-Reply-To: <9849.1157018310@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-cachefs-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-cachefs-bounces@redhat.com List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 10:58:30 +0100 David Howells wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > > > - Send fine-grained incremental patches. It's OK to do complete > > replacement patchsets when the code is new, but this stuff is supposed to > > be stabilised. > > I thought the code was still officially *new*. It's been floating around for ages; we want it to become *old*, showing a decreasing rate of change. > As I understood things from what you said, you delegated responsibility for my > patches on to Trond, who hasn't taken them yet. Trond merged the large nfs-affecting ones; I don't know if he intends to handle the non-nfs bulk of the work though. I doesn't matter, really - I'll frequently carry features with a plan to send them into a subsystem tree. Or Trond could duck it and I can send the patches direct to Linus after git-nfs has merged. Either way, the patches which are presently in -mm are "in the pipeline" - they're the ones which people are testing (for compile, at least) and reviewing (hah). If we decide to send them into Trond then I'll add them to my things-to-spam-maintainers-with pile. 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. > He has further delegated > review responsibility on to Christoph, so I've been consolidating my patches > to make it easier for Christoph (or whoever) to do so. These patches are quite large and complex. Frankly, I doubt if Trond or Christoph have the bandwidth to review them. It would be excellent if they were able to, but... We have a large coder-versus-reviewer imbalance, especially in the filesystems area. cf reiser4. > So, as I understand the situation, my patches won't go anywhere until > Christoph ACKs them and Trond takes them into his tree. If this isn't so, > please clarify the situation. > 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.