On Sat, 29 Mar 2014, Ilya Dryomov wrote: > On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 3:46 AM, Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 03/28/2014 07:41 PM, Sage Weil wrote: > >> Hi Alex, Ilya, > >> > >> I've added this and the previous patch to a for-linus branch to send to > >> Linux for 3.14. The net of the two patches is simply removing the assert, > >> however... the first changes several lines that then get changed back. > >> Should we squash them? > > > > In my opinion, yes. Ilya's movement of the assert within > > the spinlock was solving one problem, but ultimately that > > assertion should go away. > > Sage, the way you squashed it we lost Alex's authorship and ended up > with his Signed-off-by, my Reviewed-by and me as an Author. Since you > haven't pulled it into kernel.org yet, I did > > git commit --amend --author='Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxx>' > > on for-linus to restore justice ;) Thanks! I'm noticing now that the commit description doesn't make much sense, though, since it is talking about the conditions after the first patch.. might just send the originals, unless Alex wants to rewrite it. sage -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
