On Sun, Aug 25, 2024 at 08:18:25AM GMT, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Sun, Aug 25, 2024 at 05:32:01PM GMT, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Sun, 25 Aug 2024 at 04:20, Kent Overstreet <kent.overstr...@linux.dev> > > wrote: > > > > > > - rhashtable conversion for vfs inodes > > > - rcu_pending, btree key cache conversion > > > + nocow deadlock fix > > > + fix for new rebalance_work accounting > > > > I'd have preferred to get a proper list. I edited something together. > > > > > fs/super.c: improve get_tree() error message > > > > Ugh. Please use '%d' instead of '%i'. Yes, yes, we use both, because > > some people seem to think that 'i' makes more sense. but %d is > > *hugely* more common by over an order of magnitude, and '%i' only > > makes sense for sscanf (and then has magic properties that it does > > *NOT* have on output).
Didn't know that about %i... > > > > I've pulled this, but reacted to it because it was to generic vfs code. > > The patch to vfs_get_tree() has never been sent to the VFS maintainers > and it has never been on any mailing list (at least not on fsdevel and > not on bcachefs ml as well from lore.kernel.org). > > Yes, this is a minor change in this case but it's still not ok to just > include patches in a pull request that have never been on any list and > haven't seen by the maintainers. This isn't the first time. > > So please, I want to see all patches that touch VFS generic code on > fsdevel with the maintainers Cced. I ran it by David Howells on IRC because it was trivial, but I'll do that in the future.
