From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] writeback: get rid of generic_sync_sb_inodes() export Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 13:05:36 +0200 Message-ID: <20090908110536.GV18599@kernel.dk> References: <1252401791-22463-1-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <1252401791-22463-2-git-send-email-jens.axboe@oracle.com> <4AA631AA.6000803@gmail.com> <20090908104111.GS18599@kernel.dk> <1252407150.5060.51.camel@localhost> <20090908105728.GU18599@kernel.dk> <4AA63992.7040200@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, chris.mason@oracle.com, david@fromorbit.com, hch@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jack@suse.cz To: Artem Bityutskiy Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AA63992.7040200@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 08 2009, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On 09/08/2009 01:57 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> But well, if you do not want to carry my patch, then I'll have to >>> re-base my tree later, fix stuff, and send a pull request. I mean, >>> your stuff will for sure be merged first, because I send pull requests >>> late, just because UBIFS is a minor thing in the kernel. >> >> You don't have to rebase, if my work is merged first then you just merge >> Linus' tree into yours and fixup the conflict before asking Linus to >> pull. > > I thought Linus asked to avoid merge commits in pull requests at some > point, no? So I thought that I'd re-base then, which Linus also > dislikes :-) Pointless merges are discouraged, but this one isn't pointless since it resolves a conflict. If you rebase, Linus will flame your ass to a crisp, I know from personal experience :-) >> It's a trivial conflict, I don't understand what the fuzz is about. > > Well, I was just thinking how to avoid merge commits. But I guess I can > do what you suggest. Just don't worry about it, things are fine as-is. When the conflict happens with the mainline tree, fix it up. If it was a more involved depdency chain, we could do something more about it. But for this, I'd say it's a lot more work to attempt to "fix" something that is a 10s merge issue at pull time. -- Jens Axboe