Re: [PATCH] bcache: writeback rate clamping: make 32 bit safe

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

 



Jens--

Thanks for your patience.

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 10/16/2017 11:34 AM, Michael Lyle wrote:
>> Sorry this got through to linux-block, was detected by the kbuilds test
>> robot.  NSEC_PER_SEC is a long constant; 2.5 * 10^9 doesn't fit in a
>> signed long constant.
>
> Applied, but you should remember to add Fixes lines when a patch
> explicitly fixes a problem introduced by a previous patch. Ala:
>
> Fixes: e41166c5c44e ("bcache: writeback rate shouldn't artifically clamp")
>
> so that backports have an easier time finding dependent fixes.

Sorry about that too. I considered the Fixes: tag but didn't know if
the hashes would "hold true" into mainline.  Now I see Linus merges
your tree so the hash should be durable.

>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>

Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux