From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39968 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730634AbgJNJWk (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2020 05:22:40 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x443.google.com (mail-pf1-x443.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::443]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8466C0A88B8 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 18:19:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x443.google.com with SMTP id 10so979233pfp.5 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 18:19:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] DASD FC endpoint security References: <20201008131336.61100-1-sth@linux.ibm.com> <20201012183550.GA12341@imap.linux.ibm.com> <07b0f296-e0b2-1383-56a1-0d5411c101da@kernel.dk> <17e1142c-4108-6f74-971a-dee007162786@kernel.dk> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <6468cfad-e14c-060d-a525-00d75fe66819@kernel.dk> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 19:19:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-ID: To: Stefan Haberland Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Jan Hoeppner , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Christian Borntraeger On 10/13/20 2:15 PM, Stefan Haberland wrote: > Am 13.10.20 um 21:40 schrieb Jens Axboe: >> On 10/12/20 1:50 PM, Stefan Haberland wrote: >>> Am 12.10.20 um 21:33 schrieb Jens Axboe: >>>> On 10/12/20 1:06 PM, Stefan Haberland wrote: >>>>> Hi Jens, >>>>> >>>>> quick ping. Are you going to apply this for 5.10? >>>> I actually wasn't planning on it - it arrived a bit late, and >>>> it seemed like one of those things that needed a bit more review >>>> talk before being able to be applied. >>>> >>> OK, too bad. I had hoped that this was still OK. >>> The patches have been tested and reviewed internally for quite a while. >>> Which actually was the reason for the late submission. Cornelia also >>> gave her RB last week. >> I'm not worried about the stability of it as much as whether the special >> feature is warranted. From the former point of view, it's probably fine >> to go in now. >>> But OK, if you think this needs some more review we will have to wait >>> for 5.11. >> I'd definitely feel more comfortable with that. >> > > OK, I will take care that features will be sent earlier next time. Thanks, ideally I like to have new stuff like that in my tree (and for-next) for at least a week prior to the merge window opening. > So, instead could you please apply the patches for 5.11 as soon as it is > suitable? I will - I have it queued up, won't create anything public until we get past the merge window. -- Jens Axboe