From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 509ACC07E95 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 02:57:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED8DB61019 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 02:57:22 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org ED8DB61019 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 840D68D0002; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 22:57:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 7F1938D0001; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 22:57:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 691818D0002; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 22:57:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0117.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.117]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 414498D0001 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 22:57:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin14.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF4128248047 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 02:57:21 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78381455082.14.EAA4368 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf29.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CDA690025AD for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 02:56:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=ddFeRTWSZ+X6AQt7FcVLxDNr63yOS1Yd3t70mbLKXzI=; b=fYVv5ucLOhkhhtiSIF6xRyOBP/ cV2wxlhBWulN2BlKt7DKyAIpW8oHCxoaAiVn7MyLfJcicfsvg6gGseiEgURzMwwnMS7jT2LU6GU5F hGSh9x5DQLDv5fjLewivc1nojYhfvj3CpsXA6/vUqnoRBz8ctTUdEBlEZ0JAwLX7RGMqkYdGVan2c shYhxrL9h+6gYowbcRGRe3CwTyKOrjQst/M7BOko3HHS88vHiktdRW6xoNBi9QblTYs0JrqGjm+wp RufyTCMtwv1Nz4mDF/cZEFBkGyTCcNnbS1479nGyIJH3LdXbeiYJHLSmZcIJeIpgkmHNUo4oSQi8f PWZmsH6A==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1m5fv6-007iR0-47; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 02:55:48 +0000 Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 03:55:44 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Folio tree for next Message-ID: References: <20210718205758.65254408be0b2a17cfad7809@linux-foundation.org> <20210720094033.46b34168@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210720094033.46b34168@canb.auug.org.au> Authentication-Results: imf29.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=fYVv5ucL; spf=none (imf29.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org; dmarc=none X-Stat-Signature: 7zax354sdad4t38k4m3nysw55dahnho9 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7CDA690025AD X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-HE-Tag: 1626749767-402324 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 09:40:33AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > On Sun, 18 Jul 2021 20:57:58 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 04:18:19 +0100 Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > > Please include a new tree in linux-next: > > > > > > https://git.infradead.org/users/willy/pagecache.git/shortlog/refs/heads/for-next > > > aka > > > git://git.infradead.org/users/willy/pagecache.git for-next > > > > > > There are some minor conflicts with mmotm. I resolved some of them by > > > pulling in three patches from mmotm and rebasing on top of them. > > > These conflicts (or near-misses) still remain, and I'm showing my > > > resolution: > > > > I'm thinking that it would be better if I were to base all of the -mm > > MM patches on linux-next. Otherwise Stephen is going to have a pretty > > miserable two months... > > If they are only minor conflicts, then please leave them to me (and > Linus). That way if Linus decides not to take the folio tree or the > mmotm changes (or they get radically changed), then they are not > contaminated by each other ... hints (or example resolutions) are > always welcome. I think conceptually, the folio for-next tree is part of mmotm for this cycle. I would have asked Andrew to carry these patches, but there are people (eg Dave Howells) who want to develop against them. And that's hard to do with patches that are in mmotm. So if Andrew bases mmotm on the folio tree for this cycle, does that make sense?