On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 05:31:14PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > AFAICT, nobody is attempting to land any major changes in any of the vfs > remap functions during the 5.10 window -- for-next showed conflicts only > in the Makefile, so it seems like a quiet enough time to do this. There > are no functional changes here, it's just moving code blocks around. > > So, I have a few questions, particularly for Al, Andrew, and Linus: > > (1) Do you find this reorganizing acceptable? No objections, assuming that it's really a move (it's surprisingly easy to screw that up - BTDT ;-/) I have not done function-by-function comparison, but assuming it holds... no problem. > (2) I was planning to rebase this series next Friday and try to throw it > in at the end of the merge window; is that ok? (The current patches are > based on 5.9, and applying them manually to current master and for-next > didn't show any new conflicts.) Up to Linus. I don't have anything in vfs.git around that area; the only remaining stuff touching fs/read_write.c is nowhere near those, AFAICS.
