On 05/14/2009 06:35 PM, James Bottomley wrote: <snip> >> >> I see that you rebased by now, though I suspect the fc's blk_end_request >> call will fail to build if merged with block tree. > > Yes, that's the bit we need a postmerge tree for. It has to build on > it's own in scsi-misc, but it's making use of an API Tejun is altering, > so the block postmerge has to do the API alteration based on the SCSI > tree. > Tejun's cleanup is a bit tricky and cross trees wide. It will need to be completely postponed to post merge which will be a pity since there are so many patches ontop of it in block-next. Unless we want to sacrifice the build ability of the tree between block-merge and the fixup to this driver. Perhaps you could do a scsi-post-merge tree that has only this driver, already with the new needed code? >> I'm also seeing some recent changes to block git so I suspect that Jens is >> in the middle of rebasing too. (I hope) >> <snip> Boaz -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
