From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
"Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs-brauner tree with the ext4 tree
Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 18:04:34 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240508220434.GA3620298@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240508165953.67afc064@canb.auug.org.au>
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 04:59:53PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 8 May 2024 08:47:00 +0200 Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> >
> > Ted, if you still can maybe just drop the ext4 patch for now? I can
> > redo it for next merge window with the moved flag.
>
> If the resolution I did is fine, I am sure Linus will cope (but worth
> mentioning it to him in the pull request). Its a simple enough conflict.
I agree... but at the same time, the patch in question is a cleanup
and there's not a lot of downside in dropping this for a cycle.
Cristoph, is that right? Will not taking this cleanup block anything
that you were hoping to land this cycle?
I'm fine either way with either asking Linus to fix up the merge, or
dropping it and picking it up later. In fact, I'd be fine just simply
landing this post -rc1.
So what do people think? Again, I don't have strong opinions one way
or another.
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-08 22:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-08 0:34 linux-next: manual merge of the vfs-brauner tree with the ext4 tree Stephen Rothwell
2024-05-08 6:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-05-08 6:59 ` Stephen Rothwell
2024-05-08 22:04 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2024-05-14 1:28 ` Stephen Rothwell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-08-21 0:07 Stephen Rothwell
2023-08-21 0:25 ` Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240508220434.GA3620298@mit.edu \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).