On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 10:39 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 10:38:09AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > No need to change anything in this case, but in the future if there > > are no patch dependency or ordering issues can you let me take the > > SELinux patches via the SELinux tree? It helps prevent merge > > conflicts during the next merge window and quiets the daily automated > > checks I have in place to detect SELinux changes outside of the > > SELinux tree. > > Even if this goes into the next merge window we'd need it in the vfs > tree as it is preparation for other work on VFS interfaces. That's fine, I would consider that part of the "patch dependency" case I mentioned above. My motivation for commenting on this is that I've seen a few recent cases where some other subsystems have been quick to merge SELinux, etc. patches and I just wanted to ask that some consideration be made as it causes us (me) some level of pain. If there is a good reason for it, that's fine, being a maintainer is a life of pain ;) but if it is simply to just get the patch merged into an upstream tree a day or two earlier I would please ask you to exercise patience and let it be merged via the appropriate tree. -- paul-moore.com
