On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 11:09:44PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 09:44:35AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > FWIW, I'm not opposed to making such a locking change - I'm more > > concerned about the fact I'm finding out about plans for such a > > fundamental locking change from a pull request on the last day of a > > merge window.... > > Look at the commit message (*and* pull request posting) of an earlier vfs.git > pull request in the beginning of this window. Or into the thread back in > May when it had been first proposed (and pretty much the same patch had been > generated and posted by Linus). Changes needed for parallel ->lookup() had > been discussed; it was a side branch of one of the RCU symlink threads and > ISTR your own postings in it. See http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2160034.html for the former (Jan 12, two days into this window) and e.g. https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/5/16/297 for the latter. And yes, you had been Cc'd on that thread back in May, including the posting in question - even posted in other branches of that thread, both before and after... -- 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
