BTW, it looks like your 2/2 patch does not have a dependency on the rest of the resize patches, and fixes a problem which exists today with the flex_bg resizing. So you'll see I moved it to the beginning of the patch series, and added a "Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx", since it's a patch that should be backported to older stable kernels. This kind of applicability statement is helpful for me, since I don't have to try to figure it out (and because I might get it wrong as I try to figure out the reasoning behind a patch, and the priority of the patch). Things that are useful to include is whether it is fixing a recent regression, or if it is fixing a bug that is in older kernels, how long has the bug been present, so we know which older kernels need the patch, and in particular, whether enterprise distributions need to worry about backporting the patch. And as I mentioned earlier, if it causes user data loss/corruption, or causes the kernel to crash, please make a note of this in the commit description, since that's also important information when trying to decide if a patch needs priority handling or needs to be backported to older stable kernels. Thanks, regards, - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
