Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Your CONFIG_BLOCK patches did a decent job of trashing your > fs-cache-make-kafs-* patches, btw. What's up with that? OK, it's sensible > for people to work against mainline but the net effect of doing that is to > create a mess for other people to clean up. It seems the only problem in my patches is that the file address space operations have had the sync_pages op removed in a patch in the disable-block-layer patchset as it's no longer necessary. However, as I suspect you're applying the block patches *before* the FS-Cache patches, I can't give you an incremental patch that you can apply after the other fs-cache-make-kafs-* patches, since you need to modify the first patch (fs-cache-make-kafs-use-fs-cache.patch) to get it to apply at all now. So, I could issue a revised AFS+FS-Cache patch, would that do? Or would you rather have a patch that you can apply to the one you already have directly and modify it in place? David - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
