xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 16/20] xfs: pass a 64-bit count argument to xfs_iomap_write_u

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/20] xfs: pass a 64-bit count argument to xfs_iomap_write_unwritten
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 06:24:04 +1100
Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20150202073024.GA9399@xxxxxx>
References: <1421925006-24231-1-git-send-email-hch@xxxxxx> <1421925006-24231-17-git-send-email-hch@xxxxxx> <20150129205232.GB11064@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20150202073024.GA9399@xxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 08:30:24AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 03:52:32PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > Who can give us ACKs on these last five fs/xfs patches?  (And is it
> > going to cause trouble if they go in through the nfsd tree?)
> 
> 
> We'd need ACKs from Dave.  He already has pulled in two patches so
> we might run into some conflicts.  Maybe the best idea is to add the
> exportfs patch to both the XFS and nfsd trees, so each of them can
> pull in the rest?  Or we could commit the two XFS preparation patches
> to both tree and get something that compiles and works in the nfsd
> tree.

This patch has already been committed to the XFS repo.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>