lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jun]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the vfs tree
    On Fri, 22 Jun 2018, Al Viro wrote:
    > On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 01:45:23PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
    > > Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > > Thomas and David, please let me know what I can do from my side to help
    > > > with this.
    > >
    > > You could try basing on Al Viro's for-next tree which has the mount API
    > > changes in it.
    >
    > Umm... That would be a massive headache for everyone involved; the changes
    > in there have very little in common with what you are doing in rdt_mount(),
    > so it might make sense to start with a minimal never-rebased branch that
    > would
    > * define rdt_pseudo_lock_init as 0
    > * define rdt_pseudo_lock_release as empty
    > * do the rdt_mount() part of a3dbd01e6c9d
    > * have commit message along the lines of
    > "hooks in rdt_mount() for rdt_pseudo_lock to use
    >
    > Functionally a no-op right now; the only reason for having that
    > as a never-rebased branch to get rdt_pseudo_lock and mount series
    > out of each other's hair"
    >
    > Base that on -rc1, then pull it into your rdt branch and David could pull the
    > same into his.

    Yes, that works.

    Reinette, can you please look into creating that ordering. Then we just zap
    the existing branch and redo it with this scheme.

    Thanks,

    tglx

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2018-06-22 15:40    [W:2.410 / U:0.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site