Re: dm: use gcd() to fix chunk_sectors limit stacking

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 12/2/20 1:14 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02 2020 at 12:03am -0500,
> Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> What you've done here is fairly chaotic/disruptive:
>> 1) you emailed a patch out that isn't needed or ideal, I dealt already
>>    staged a DM fix in linux-next for 5.10-rcX, see:
>>    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/device-mapper/linux-dm.git/commit/?h=dm-5.10-rcX&id=f28de262ddf09b635095bdeaf0e07ff507b3c41b
>> 2) you replied to your patch and started referencing snippets of this
>>    other patch's header (now staged for 5.10-rcX via Jens' block tree):
>>    https://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux-block/commit/?h=block-5.10&id=7e7986f9d3ba69a7375a41080a1f8c8012cb0923
>>    - why not reply to _that_ patch in response something stated in it?
> 
> I now see you did reply to the original v2 patch:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2020-December/msg00006.html
> 
> but you changed the Subject to have a "dm" prefix for some reason.

In my original purpose, this is a new patch, 'dm: XXXXXXXX'. This patch
should coexist with your patch 'block: XXXXXX'.

Can I say that it's totally a mistake ;)


> Strange but OK.. though it got really weird when you cut-and-paste your
> other DM patch in reply at the bottom of your email.  If you find
> yourself cross referencing emails and cutting and pasting like that, you
> probably shouldn't.  Makes it chaotic for others to follow along.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mike
> 

-- 
Thanks,
Jeffle

--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel




[Index of Archives]     [DM Crypt]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux