[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19f9dd7a-71a6-cf06-9272-bf4b8c74d2bd@pengutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 09:35:11 +0200
From: Oleksij Rempel <ore@...gutronix.de>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steffen Trumtrar <s.trumtrar@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] fs: ubifs: set s_uuid in super block
On 05/09/2017 09:08 AM, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at> wrote:
>>
>> Oleksij,
>>
>> Am 09.05.2017 um 07:52 schrieb Oleksij Rempel:
>>>>
>>>> If VFS maintainers are fine with that, I'll take it.
>>>> From UBIFS' POV it does not matter much. :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ping to VFS maintainers?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What ping? Al made it clear that a flag is not needed.
>>>> BTW, xfs s_uuid patch was merged to master.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm talking about ubifs patch.
>
> Me too.
:) ok
>>
>> Then we can queue this patch for 4.13.
>> Please resend and make sure it addresses everything what was also
>> suggested for the xfs s_uuid patch.
>>
>
> Just to be clear, the xfs s_uuid patch is just a memcpy,
> no different from Oleksij's patch.
So, should i change something?
here is the patch:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9674817/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists