[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <17341.1378309753@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 16:49:13 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Sage Weil <sage@...tank.com>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Milosz Tanski <milosz@...in.com>,
ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org, zheng.z.yan@...el.com,
linux-cachefs@...hat.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 0/5] ceph: persistent caching with fscache
Sage Weil <sage@...tank.com> wrote:
> David, are the fscache patches here ready for the next merge window? Do
> you have a preference for whose tree they go through?
There's only one problem - patch 1 needs to come _after_ patch 2 to avoid
breaking git bisect. Plus these patches 2 and 4 extend the fscache API
without adjusting the documentation - but that can be added later.
And I think Milosz deserves a beer (or other poison of his choice;-) for
finding a longstanding irritating bug.
I think AFS, CIFS, NFS and 9P all need patching too, but I can attend to that.
Should I take the patches through my tree? Then I can make the adjustments.
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