Re: New topic branch for block + gup work?

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

 



On 9/5/22 5:16 PM, John Hubbard wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> After you suggested a topic branch [1] as a way to address the recent
> bio_map_user_iov() conflict in linux-next, I've reviewed a few more
> patchsets in mm, and am now starting to suspect that a topic branch
> would be ideal here.
> 
> Logan's "Userspace P2PDMA with O_DIRECT NVMe devices" series [2], my
> "convert most filesystems to pin_user_pages_fast()" series [3], and the
> block layer change from [1], all conflict in iov_iter*, and in
> bio_map_user_iov().
> 
> Less of an issue but still worth considering, Dan's "Fix the DAX-gup
> mistake" series [4] conflicts in gup.c, too.
> 
> Maybe:
> 
>     gup_bio
> 
> , or something like that, as a topic branch?
> 
> Everyone: thoughts, preferences here?

My suggestion would be to branch from for-6.1/block, then we can
apply the gup patches on top of that. I'd probably just call it
for-6.1/block-gup.

-- 
Jens Axboe





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux