On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 15:48 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:19:07 +1100 Stephen Rothwell < > sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hi Ian, > > > > On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 08:30:17 +0800 Ian Kent <raven@xxxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > > > > > > I haven't had anything significant enough for autofs to warrant > > > maintaining a tree and sending push requests so I'll need to ask > > > Stephen what I need to do (perhaps you could offer some advise on > > > that > > > now Stephen, please). > > > > I guess if its just a few patches every now and then, then Andrew > > Morton may be the best person to shepherd them upstream. > > yup, send 'em along. > > I actually was handling the autofs4 stuff back in 2014 for a bit. Thanks Andrew. Last time I tried to send the module rename series we got confused some how, patches not seen leading to conflicts in applying later patches IIRC, which lead to the recommendation I send them to linux-next. The series has grown a bit too now but I'm thinking I should send them in smaller groups, such as coding style fixes and white space fixes, change to use pr* logging, etc. Hopefully that will make the process much more straight forward. The thing is the patches are mostly not urgent which is why I keep postponing sending them when higher priority things come up. As for the patch from Stanislav, I'll put that at the top of my patch queue, have a quick look at it and send it over so that, hopefully, it can get merged. I'll probably send a couple of others too to get things going on with (what I'm calling) the module rename series. Ian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe autofs" in
