From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: linux-next: block tree build failure Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 08:07:12 -0400 Message-ID: <1242216433.4728.0.camel@mulgrave.int.hansenpartnership.com> References: <20090513140413.b8a3c8d0.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <4A0A9127.90307@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:34785 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753007AbZENOcW (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2009 10:32:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4A0A9127.90307@kernel.org> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Tejun Heo Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Jens Axboe , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, James Smart , FUJITA Tomonori On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 18:21 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > > I have reverted commit b1f744937f1be3e6d3009382a755679133cf782d > > ("block: move completion related functions back to blk-core.c") and > > applied the following patch (which I realise is probably not > > correct) for today. Maybe someone can come up with a better > > solution for the scsi guys and me. > > Hmmm... is there a SCSI tree which won't be rebased? Then I can pull > blk tree into it and SCSI tree can go on from that point on. Not really ... especially now there's a proposal to redo the mvsas patch. However, block can run a postmerge tree with the changes in them. James