From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Piggin Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/18] fs: icache remove inode_lock Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 02:38:17 +1100 Message-ID: <20101015153817.GA7796@amd> References: <1286515292-15882-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1286515292-15882-18-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20101013072058.GA3121@amd> <20101013112552.GB16422@infradead.org> <20101013123008.GA6067@amd> <20101013232319.GZ4681@dastard> <20101014090609.GB3144@amd> <20101014144159.GA11972@infradead.org> <20101015040406.GA6930@amd> <20101015113336.GH4681@dastard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Nick Piggin , Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Dave Chinner Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101015113336.GH4681@dastard> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 10:33:36PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > So, Nick, please, either help us get the code into a form acceptible > to the VFS maintainers and into mainline, or stay out of the way > while we go through the process as quickly as we can. This require=D1= =95 > a co-ordinated group effort, so arguing is really quite > counter-productive. I'd prefer that you help us get through the > process by being constructive and reviewing and testing and keeping > us honest. This exact same statement applies to you, from me. We all know how to cooperate, and forking a new tree because the maintainer goes away for a few weeks (and you suddenly get interested after all this time) is not the right way to do it. =46rankly if your attitude is now demanding that I cooperate with you, then I'm actually quite happy to just go over your head.