From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, torvalds@osdl.org, steved@redhat.com,
trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no, aviro@redhat.com,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cachefs@redhat.com,
nfsv4@linux-nfs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Permit NFS superblock sharing [try #2]
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:08:38 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060302100838.63bc8741.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <13560.1141322238@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com>
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > nfs-apply-mount-root-dentry-override-to-filesystems:
> > 3 out of 10 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file fs/nfs/inode.c.rej
>
> Would it help you if I split the NFS bits out of patch 2 into a separate patch?
I wouldn't worry about splitting patches to make their application easier -
the main thing is to ensure that they're logical units from the
design/implementation POV. And that the kernel should compile (and
hopefully run) at each stage of the series.
And don't worry about the -mm-only patches - I'll sort them out. Unless
people are working against functionality which is only in -mm, they should
work against mainline.
But in the case where you're hitting hard on a particular subsystem, the
best tree to work against is that subsystem's tree. Which is a bit of a
pain if you want to put your feature out to external testers, because then
you need to also make a snapshot of the subsystem tree available as well.
That's just a cost of doing business, really. It ends up being extremely
simple if one is using quilt.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-02 18:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-01 17:36 [PATCH 0/5] Permit NFS superblock sharing [try #2] David Howells
2006-03-01 17:36 ` [PATCH 1/5] NFS: Permit filesystem to override root dentry on mount " David Howells
2006-03-01 17:36 ` [PATCH 2/5] NFS: Apply mount root dentry override to filesystems " David Howells
2006-03-01 17:36 ` [PATCH 3/5] NFS: Abstract out namespace initialisation " David Howells
2006-03-01 17:36 ` [PATCH 4/5] NFS: Add dentry materialisation op " David Howells
2006-03-01 17:36 ` [PATCH 5/5] NFS: Unify NFS superblocks per-protocol per-server " David Howells
2006-03-02 0:21 ` [PATCH 0/5] Permit NFS superblock sharing " Andrew Morton
2006-03-02 11:04 ` David Howells
2006-03-02 17:31 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-02 11:45 ` David Howells
2006-03-02 17:28 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-02 17:57 ` David Howells
2006-03-02 18:08 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060302100838.63bc8741.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=aviro@redhat.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-cachefs@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nfsv4@linux-nfs.org \
--cc=steved@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox