From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Or Gerlitz Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/iser: do I/O path allocations with GFP_NOIO Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 15:55:28 +0300 Message-ID: <447D9240.3010106@voltaire.com> References: <447CA214.7010202@cs.wisc.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from taurus.voltaire.com ([193.47.165.240]:42383 "EHLO taurus.voltaire.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964988AbWEaMzd (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 May 2006 08:55:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Mike Christie Cc: Roland Dreier , openib-general@openib.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Roland Dreier wrote: > It's a problem because SRP and iSER are straddling both the SCSI and > IB worlds. Probably the best policy is to cc all relevant mailing > lists (at least linux-scsi and openib-general) whenever there's a > doubt about who should see something. We are monitoring linux-scsi for tracking iscsi upstream updates. > As far as merging patches goes, I've been merging SRP changes directly > to Linus, except for generic fixes to , which I've been > sending through James. Or felt that iSCSI should be merged through my > tree, but I have no problem if in the future patches bypass my tree. > (But I would like to be cc'ed on changes to IB stuff, especially core > things outside of specific drivers) At this point, we prefer that iser related updates/merges would go through Roland, the IB maintainer, if this poses a problem for scsi/iscsi updates we are open to send our updates/merges via the scsi maintainer. Or.