[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 13:38:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
CC: viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: remove set_fs for riscv v2
On Tue, 08 Sep 2020 23:55:15 PDT (-0700), Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 09:59:29PM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>>>
>>> The first four patches are general improvements and enablement for all nommu
>>> ports, and might make sense to merge through the above base branch.
>>
>> Seems like it to me. These won't work without the SET_FS code so I'm OK if you
>> guys want to keep them all together. Otherwise I think I'd need to wait until
>> the SET_FS stuff gets merged before taking any of these, which would be a bit
>> of a headache.
>
> now that we've sorted out a remaining issue base.set_fs should not
> be rebased any more, so you could pull it into the riscv tree or a topic
> branch.
>
> The first four patch should go into base.set_fs, though. Arnd, can you
> re-review the updated patches?
OK, assuming the first four land through vfs I'll take the rest through my
tree. I wasn't sure it was OK to merge another subtree into my tree, as IIRC I
got told not to do something like that before, but I'll go figure out a sane
way to handle it.
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists