linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4 0/5] ceph: persistent caching with fscache

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

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/