Add exofs to osd/linux-next

Add exofs to osd/linux-next

[Boaz Harrosh]

Hi dear Stephen.

Are you currently accepting 2.6.30 material into Linux-next?

I want to add the exofs patches onto the open-osd initiator patches.
These patches have gone through two cycles of review and I will
send a third round next week. It was generally agreed they should
be accepted into kernel right behind the osd initiator patches, given
positive review. Meanwhile I would like them to sit in linux-next
to make sure they are consumable by the different ARCHs and so on.

Awaiting your consent, I will silently point my osd/linux-next branch
to also include these patches, so there is nothing you have to do.
Also, once the osd-initiator patches get accepted into James's scsi-misc
tree, (soon I hope), I will rebase the osd tree over scsi-misc, so if you
keep the osd tree at the end like today the transition should be smooth.

Thank you
Boaz

Re: Add exofs to osd/linux-next

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1498 bytes --]

Hi Boaz,

On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 19:30:52 +0200 Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com> wrote:
>
> Are you currently accepting 2.6.30 material into Linux-next?

Yes, since -rc1 was released.

> I want to add the exofs patches onto the open-osd initiator patches.
> These patches have gone through two cycles of review and I will
> send a third round next week. It was generally agreed they should
> be accepted into kernel right behind the osd initiator patches, given
> positive review. Meanwhile I would like them to sit in linux-next
> to make sure they are consumable by the different ARCHs and so on.
> 
> Awaiting your consent, I will silently point my osd/linux-next branch
> to also include these patches, so there is nothing you have to do.

That sounds fine by me.

> Also, once the osd-initiator patches get accepted into James's scsi-misc
> tree, (soon I hope), I will rebase the osd tree over scsi-misc, so if you
> keep the osd tree at the end like today the transition should be smooth.

As long as the patches in James tree and your tree match, there should be
no need to rebase your later work (unless you depend on other stuff in
the scsi-misc tree).  In fact you should not do so unless James
guarantees that the scsi-misc tree will not rebase.  Otherwise I will
possibly end up with two different versions of the scsi-misc tree in
linux-next :-(

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]