Re: [PATCH 03/29] 9p: move xattr-related structs to .rodata

[Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@codewreck.org>]

Wedson Almeida Filho wrote on Tue, Oct 03, 2023 at 10:55:44AM -0300:
> > Looks good to me on principle as well (and it should blow up immediately
> > on testing in the unlikely case there's a problem...)
> >
> > Eric, I don't think you have anything planned for this round?
> > There's another data race patch laying around that we didn't submit for
> > 6.6, shall I take these two for now?
> >
> > (Assuming this patch series is meant to be taken up by individual fs
> > maintainers independantly, it's never really clear with such large
> > swatches of patchs and we weren't in Cc of a cover letter if there was
> > any... In the future it'd help if either there's a clear cover letter
> > everyone is in Cc at (some would say keep everyone in cc of all
> > patches!), or just send these in a loop so they don't appear to be part
> > of a series and each maintainer deals with it as they see fit)
> 
> There is a cover letter
> (https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230930050033.41174-1-wedsonaf@gmail.com/),
> apologies for not CCing you there. I was trying to avoid spamming
> maintainers with unrelated changes.
> 
> We need changes in fs/xattr.c (which are in the first patch of the
> series) to avoid warnings, so unfortunately this can't be taken
> individually. My thought was that individual fs maintainers would
> review/ack the patches and this would be taken through the fs tree.

Please include all related maintainers in cover letter and any "common"
patch: I'd have complained about the warning if I had taken the time to
try it out :)

(b4 made it easy to download a whole thread, but it was't obvious this
was required -- I honestly prefer receiving the whole thread than too
little patch but I know some maintainers are split on this... At least I
think we'll all agree cover letter and required dependencies are useful
though -- I now see David Sterba told you something similar, but only
after having written that so leaving it in)

By the way the shmem patch failed to apply to 6.6-rc4 and will need
rebasing.

With all that said, I've taken a few minutes to check it didn't blow up,
so:
Acked-by: Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@codewreck.org>

-- 
Dominique Martinet | Asmadeus