[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150129051555.GC29656@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 05:15:55 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the vfs tree
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 06:11:02PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 04:54:22AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > I don't mind opening a never-rebased branch for generic iov_iter-related stuff;
> > if you prefer to handle it that way - just tell. The first two patches
> > from that series would definitely go there; as for the rest... no preferences
> > here.
>
> It might make sense to just keep the VFS patches in your tree.
> The target ones also are something I'd prefer if it goes through Nic
> with additional review. In addition they aren't really critical,
> so if you merge the prep patches now we can feed the rest through
> the proper trees in the .21 merge window.
Done. The first two are in #iov_iter now (merged into #for-next), the
rest is dropped. And #iov_iter is in never-rebased mode, so feel free
to pull it wherever you need it.
--
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