On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 11:10:00AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 11:36:47AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 06:01:05PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > Ok, sounds good. I just sent out my first attempt at a pull request to Linus, > > > so I'll queue this series for another pull req. after that. > > > > I'll resend with a few minor updates based on the comments from Brian > > in a few days, so this should be ready for -rc4. > > So I just noticed that this series was merged into for-next (which iiuc > is easily fixable, yes?). Yep. for-next can be rebased. > Christoph already mentioned he was sending a new variant... but > juuuuuust a note that not all of these patches had a reviewed-by yet > either. ;) <nod> I'm aware; I'll be more patient next time. :) TBH I was also curious to have the kbuild robot / linux-next pick up a changeset that wasn't terribly likely to break anything else, just to see how they run... --D > > Brian > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
