Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > David, are the fscache patches here ready for the next merge window? Do > you have a preference for whose tree they go through? There's only one problem - patch 1 needs to come _after_ patch 2 to avoid breaking git bisect. Plus these patches 2 and 4 extend the fscache API without adjusting the documentation - but that can be added later. And I think Milosz deserves a beer (or other poison of his choice;-) for finding a longstanding irritating bug. I think AFS, CIFS, NFS and 9P all need patching too, but I can attend to that. Should I take the patches through my tree? Then I can make the adjustments. 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
