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: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 09:34:51 -0700 Message-ID: <20060901093451.87aa486d.akpm@osdl.org> 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> <9534.1157116114@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> 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, steved@redhat.com, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-cachefs@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: David Howells In-Reply-To: <9534.1157116114@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfsv4-bounces@linux-nfs.org Errors-To: nfsv4-bounces@linux-nfs.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 14:08:34 +0100 David Howells wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > > > 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. > > It seems the only problem in my patches is that the file address space > operations have had the sync_pages op removed in a patch in the > disable-block-layer patchset as it's no longer necessary. > > However, as I suspect you're applying the block patches *before* the FS-Cache > patches, Yes, I stage the subsystem trees ahead of everything else. So a) things which get merged into a subsystem tree effectively do a queue-jump and b) I spend much of the merge window twiddling thumbs until the git trees have merged. > I can't give you an incremental patch that you can apply after the > other fs-cache-make-kafs-* patches, since you need to modify the first patch > (fs-cache-make-kafs-use-fs-cache.patch) to get it to apply at all now. > > So, I could issue a revised AFS+FS-Cache patch, would that do? Or would you > rather have a patch that you can apply to the one you already have directly > and modify it in place? I fixed it all up, I think. Please review-and-test rc5-mm1 (including hot-fixes/ contents, which grows apace). nfs automounter submounts are still broken in Trond's tree, btw. Are we stuck?