Hi Willy, Sorry for the slow response. On Tue, 14 May 2024 23:57:36 +0100 Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > At LSFMM we're talking about the need to do more integrated testing with > the various fs trees, the fs infrastructure and the vfs. We'd like to > avoid that testing be blocked by a bad patch in, say, a graphics driver. > > A solution we're kicking around would be for linux-next to include a > 'fs-next' branch which contains the trees which have opted into this > new branch. Would this be tremendously disruptive to your workflow or > would this be an easy addition? How would this be different from what happens at the moment with all the separate file system trees and the various "vfs" trees? I can include any tree. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell
Attachment:
pgpIjz9ghcqY9.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
