[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <11507.1157046128@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:42:08 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, trond.myklebust@....uio.no,
hch@...radead.org
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, torvalds@...l.org,
steved@...hat.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-cachefs@...hat.com, nfsv4@...ux-nfs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Permit filesystem local caching and NFS superblock sharing [try #13]
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org> wrote:
> Trond merged the large nfs-affecting ones; I don't know if he intends to
> handle the non-nfs bulk of the work though.
There is one large NFS affecting patch left: namely the one that makes NFS use
FS-Cache. I presume that requires Trond's agreement to merge.
> Your CONFIG_BLOCK patches did a decent job of trashing your
> fs-cache-make-kafs-* patches, btw. What's up with that? OK, it's sensible
> for people to work against mainline but the net effect of doing that is to
> create a mess for other people to clean up.
Hmmm... Jens wanted my block patches against his tree; you wanted my NFS
patches against Trond's NFS tree. I guess I should try stacking the whole
lot, but against what? And who carries the fixes? A patch to fix this
problem may well only apply to a tree that's the conjunction of both:-/
> If Christoph acks them then I can send them to Trond or Linus, at Trond's
> option.
>
> Or I can butt out, drop the patches, wait for them to turn up in Trond's
> tree, at your option.
Trond, Christoph? Any thoughts?
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists