> On Sep 23, 2010, at 1:29 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > Looks fine to me, and I prefer this approach to the one we have today. > > > > Note, however, that I've already applied commit > > d688e11007419fd060ae74d8d952a5c4ece735aa (NFSv4.1: Fix the slotid > > initialisation in nfs_async_rename()) to the nfs-for-2.6.37 branch. > > > > Are people happy with me rebasing nfs-for-2.6.37 to remove the above > > commit, and apply this one instead? I'm happier with incremental patches and no rebasing--I like having the history around--but the rebase won't cause me serious practical problems. --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
