linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the vfs-idmapping tree

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 11 May 2023 20:04:54 +0200
From:   Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Seth Forshee <sforshee@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the
 vfs-idmapping tree

On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 11:07:50AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> On Wed, 10 May 2023 06:48:39 -0600 Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, since Linus didn't like the original approach, it was redone
> > and that particular patch was originally forgotten and then redone
> > without the 'nonblock' variable. So you should just ignore the
> > old version, and Christian should just drop that branch from his
> > for-next tree as it's dead.
> 
> That appears to have been done now, thanks.

Yeah, sorry. LSFMM makes it a bit hard to be consistent about my
replies and after my first reply I only had rolled vfs/for-next rolled
forward but not vfs-idmapping/for-next. The latter repo will likely go
away soonish and then only vfs/* will be left.

Christian