[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJfpegtOKLDy-j=oi8BsT+xjFnO+Mk7=8VxSDuyi-bxhRSGMKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2023 10:44:37 +0100
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: Krister Johansen <kjlx@...pleofstupid.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
German Maglione <gmaglione@...hat.com>,
Greg Kurz <groug@...d.org>, Max Reitz <mreitz@...hat.com>,
Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@...tmail.fm>,
"Borah, Chaitanya Kumar" <chaitanya.kumar.borah@...el.com>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
"Kurmi, Suresh Kumar" <suresh.kumar.kurmi@...el.com>,
"Saarinen, Jani" <jani.saarinen@...el.com>,
lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
regressions@...ts.linux.dev, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fuse submount_lookup needs to be initialized
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 at 23:37, Krister Johansen <kjlx@...pleofstupid.com> wrote:
> Either should do, but I wasn't sure which approach was preferable.
An incremental is better in this situation. Applied and pushed.
> Thanks, and my apologies for the inconvenience.
Really no need to apologize, this happens and the best possible
outcome is that it get fixed before being released.
Thanks,
Miklos
Powered by blists - more mailing lists