On Tue, 2017-06-20 at 09:25 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 12:23:46 -0400 Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > If there are no major objections to this set, I'd like to have > > linux-next start picking it up to get some wider testing. What's the > > right vehicle for this, given that it touches stuff all over the tree? > > > > I can see 3 potential options: > > > > 1) I could just pull these into the branch that Stephen is already > > picking up for file-locks in my tree > > > > 2) I could put them into a new branch, and have Stephen pull that one in > > addition to the file-locks branch > > > > 3) It could go in via someone else's tree entirely (Andrew or Al's > > maybe?) > > > > I'm fine with any of these. Anyone have thoughts? > > Given that this is a one off development, either 1 or 3 (in Al's tree) > would be fine. 2 is a possibility (but people forget to ask me to > remove one shot trees :-() > Ok -- yeah, I'd probably be one of those people who forget too... In that case, I'll plan to go ahead and just merge these into my linux-next branch. That's easier than bugging others for it. Hopefully we won't have a lot in the way of merge conflicts. I'll see about getting this into branch later today, and hopefully we can get it into linux-next for tomorrow. Thanks! -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
