| To: | "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 16/20] xfs: pass a 64-bit count argument to xfs_iomap_write_unwritten |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 2 Feb 2015 08:30:24 +0100 |
| Cc: | Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20150129205232.GB11064@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1421925006-24231-1-git-send-email-hch@xxxxxx> <1421925006-24231-17-git-send-email-hch@xxxxxx> <20150129205232.GB11064@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) |
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. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfs: don't allocate an ioend for direct I/O completions, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 1/5] xfs: struct xfs_sb is no longer tied to the on-disk format, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | [dgc-xfs:xfs-ioctl-setattr-cleanup 11/12] fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c:1146:1: sparse: symbol 'xfs_ioctl_setattr_check_projid' was not declared. Should it be static?, kbuild test robot |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 16/20] xfs: pass a 64-bit count argument to xfs_iomap_write_unwritten, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |