* [GIT PULL] block fixes for 3.9-rc
@ 2013-03-29 15:38 Jens Axboe
2013-03-29 18:08 ` Linus Torvalds
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2013-03-29 15:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: linux-kernel
Hi Linus,
Collection of fixes that have been queued up since the merge window
opened, hence postponed until later in the cycle. The pull request
contains:
- A bunch of fixes for the xen blk front/back driver.
- A round of fixes for the new IBM RamSan driver, fixing various nasty
issues.
- Fixes for multiple drives from Wei Yongjun, bad handling of return
values and wrong pointer math.
- A fix for loop properly killing partitions when being detached.
Please pull! As per usual, it's tagged and signed.
git://git.kernel.dk/linux-block.git for-linus
----------------------------------------------------------------
Alice Ferrazzi (1):
Block: blk-flush: Fixed indent code style
Chen Gang (1):
xen/xen-blkback: preq.dev is used without initialized
David Vrabel (1):
xen/blkback: correctly respond to unknown, non-native requests
Jan Beulich (1):
xen-blkback: fix dispatch_rw_block_io() error path
Jens Axboe (2):
rsxx: fix missing unlock on error return in rsxx_eeh_remap_dmas()
Merge branch 'stable/for-jens-3.9' of git://git.kernel.org/.../konrad/xen into for-linus
Mihnea Dobrescu-Balaur (1):
xen-blkfront: replace kmalloc and then memcpy with kmemdup
Philip J Kelleher (8):
block: IBM RamSan 70/80 trivial changes.
block: IBM RamSan 70/80 fixes inconsistent locking.
block: IBM RamSan 70/80 branding changes.
block: IBM RamSan 70/80 error message bug fix.
Adding in EEH support to the IBM FlashSystem 70/80 device driver
block: removes dynamic allocation on stack
rsxx: enable error return of rsxx_eeh_save_issued_dmas()
rsxx: remove unused variable
Phillip Susi (1):
loop: cleanup partitions when detaching loop device
Roger Pau Monne (5):
xen-blkback: fix foreach_grant_safe to handle empty lists
xen-blkfront: switch from llist to list
xen-blkback: don't store dev_bus_addr
xen-blkfront: pre-allocate pages for requests
xen-blkfront: remove frame list from blk_shadow
Wei Yongjun (4):
mtip32xx: fix error return code in mtip_pci_probe()
loop: fix error return code in loop_add()
cciss: fix invalid use of sizeof in cciss_find_cfgtables()
mg_disk: fix error return code in mg_probe()
Zoltan Kiss (1):
xen/blkback: Change statistics counter types to unsigned
MAINTAINERS | 12 +-
block/blk-flush.c | 2 +-
block/partition-generic.c | 1 +
drivers/block/Kconfig | 4 +-
drivers/block/cciss.c | 2 +-
drivers/block/loop.c | 22 +++-
drivers/block/mg_disk.c | 4 +-
drivers/block/mtip32xx/mtip32xx.c | 4 +-
drivers/block/rsxx/Makefile | 2 +-
drivers/block/rsxx/config.c | 8 +-
drivers/block/rsxx/core.c | 237 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
drivers/block/rsxx/cregs.c | 112 ++++++++++------
drivers/block/rsxx/dma.c | 239 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
drivers/block/rsxx/rsxx.h | 6 +-
drivers/block/rsxx/rsxx_cfg.h | 2 +-
drivers/block/rsxx/rsxx_priv.h | 34 ++++-
drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c | 68 +++++-----
drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h | 40 ++++--
drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c | 14 +-
drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c | 154 +++++++++++++---------
include/xen/interface/io/blkif.h | 10 ++
21 files changed, 716 insertions(+), 261 deletions(-)
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [GIT PULL] block fixes for 3.9-rc
2013-03-29 15:38 [GIT PULL] block fixes for 3.9-rc Jens Axboe
@ 2013-03-29 18:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-29 18:24 ` Jens Axboe
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2013-03-29 18:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>
> Please pull! As per usual, it's tagged and signed.
No it's not.
You have a *branch* called for-linus that contains the commits you mention.
And then you have a *tag* called for-linus, but that's just my old
head that you've gone ahead and signed, which is entirely and utterly
pointless.
Christ, the amount of confusion in that tree. Don't alias tags and
branches. And if you do, make it clear which one you mean by *saying*
so, ie "tags/for-linus", not just the ambiguous "for-linus". Now
you've confused yourself, and because of the ambiguity you never even
noticed, because the *branch* for-linus had the right commits.
Don't do this kind of thing. That branch is pointless, and just confused you.
Linus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [GIT PULL] block fixes for 3.9-rc
2013-03-29 18:08 ` Linus Torvalds
@ 2013-03-29 18:24 ` Jens Axboe
2013-03-29 18:47 ` Linus Torvalds
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2013-03-29 18:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Fri, Mar 29 2013, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
> >
> > Please pull! As per usual, it's tagged and signed.
>
> No it's not.
>
> You have a *branch* called for-linus that contains the commits you mention.
>
> And then you have a *tag* called for-linus, but that's just my old
> head that you've gone ahead and signed, which is entirely and utterly
> pointless.
Oops, that was a mistake. I must have been on the wrong branch at that
point. In past requests, I've signed the for-linus (or topic) branch
specifically.
> Christ, the amount of confusion in that tree. Don't alias tags and
> branches. And if you do, make it clear which one you mean by *saying*
> so, ie "tags/for-linus", not just the ambiguous "for-linus". Now
> you've confused yourself, and because of the ambiguity you never even
> noticed, because the *branch* for-linus had the right commits.
Agree, the aliasing is nasty and git checkout usually doesn't like it a
whole lot either...
> Don't do this kind of thing. That branch is pointless, and just
> confused you.
Tag, you mean?
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL] block fixes for 3.9-rc
2013-03-29 18:24 ` Jens Axboe
@ 2013-03-29 18:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-29 19:00 ` Jens Axboe
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2013-03-29 18:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>
>> Don't do this kind of thing. That branch is pointless, and just
>> confused you.
>
> Tag, you mean?
No. Branch. Why would you have a public branch called "for-linus",
when you intend to tag the end result before sending it to me?
It would make much more sense if you just did your development in your
"master" branch, perhaps with a separate branch for fixes during
stabilization (so that you don't mix up fixes with your future
development. Call it "fixes" or "stable" or whatever. No "for-linus"
branches anywhere. After all, the branch isn't for me at all. It's for
me only once you're ready. And at that point you tag it, so having a
*tag* called for-linus makes sense and gives us the nice signing etc.
Hmm?
Linus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [GIT PULL] block fixes for 3.9-rc
2013-03-29 18:47 ` Linus Torvalds
@ 2013-03-29 19:00 ` Jens Axboe
2013-03-29 19:57 ` Linus Torvalds
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2013-03-29 19:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Fri, Mar 29 2013, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
> >
> >> Don't do this kind of thing. That branch is pointless, and just
> >> confused you.
> >
> > Tag, you mean?
>
> No. Branch. Why would you have a public branch called "for-linus",
> when you intend to tag the end result before sending it to me?
Outside of "that's what I have always done", the intent was for others
that send patches through me to know what to base it off, if not
previous release. All those folks know that for-3.x/drivers is for the
next x release, and that for-linus is for the existing tree.
> It would make much more sense if you just did your development in your
> "master" branch, perhaps with a separate branch for fixes during
> stabilization (so that you don't mix up fixes with your future
> development. Call it "fixes" or "stable" or whatever. No "for-linus"
> branches anywhere. After all, the branch isn't for me at all. It's for
> me only once you're ready. And at that point you tag it, so having a
> *tag* called for-linus makes sense and gives us the nice signing etc.
I see your point, it's not for you YET but it will be soon. I'd rather
just keep that naming to avoid confusion with others, but tag it
appropriately (for-linus-<date>?) when it's headed your way. Then use
that proper signed tag name as the reference to you.
I prefer keeping 'master' pristine.
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL] block fixes for 3.9-rc
2013-03-29 19:00 ` Jens Axboe
@ 2013-03-29 19:57 ` Linus Torvalds
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2013-03-29 19:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>
> Outside of "that's what I have always done", the intent was for others
> that send patches through me to know what to base it off, if not
> previous release. All those folks know that for-3.x/drivers is for the
> next x release, and that for-linus is for the existing tree.
Ok. Whatever. Feel free to continue doing it, but at least then make
sure that the pull message refers to "tags/for-linus" and not that
ambiguous "for-linus" thing.
Because you screwed up that pull request, and I argue that you screwed
up exactly *because* it's ambiguous and confusing. The confusion may
have happened before too, but because git will silently default to the
branch for the ambiguous case, I just never noticed that I didn't
actually get the proper signature. Now I noticed, because you said it
was signed and yet my pull got the non-signed thing.
Linus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-03-29 19:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-03-29 15:38 [GIT PULL] block fixes for 3.9-rc Jens Axboe
2013-03-29 18:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-29 18:24 ` Jens Axboe
2013-03-29 18:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-29 19:00 ` Jens Axboe
2013-03-29 19:57 ` Linus Torvalds
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox