> On Jan 6, 2016, at 7:28 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 02:22:41PM +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote:
>> As I wrote here, the bits are already @ kernel.org
>>
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dledford/rdma.git k.o/for-4.5
>
> Ok, that's a little confusing.
>
>
On 01/06/2016 11:33 AM, Chuck Lever wrote:
>
>> On Jan 6, 2016, at 10:52 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
>>
>> On 1/6/2016 5:20 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
Chuck,
>
> Lets be concrete... anything wrong with patch [1]?
>>> Yes. It is missing Acked-by: lines from the maintainers of
>>> those files.
>
> On Jan 6, 2016, at 10:52 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
>
> On 1/6/2016 5:20 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>> Chuck,
>>> >
>>> >Lets be concrete... anything wrong with patch [1]?
>> Yes. It is missing Acked-by: lines from the maintainers of
>> those files.
>>
>> All changes to files under net/sunrpc need an
On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 07:01:14AM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> Part of the plan was that Doug's tree would be merged before
> Bruce's. But the above problem description looks like the
> maintainer trees were merged into linux-next in the other order.
The order makes no difference.
The problem is
On 1/6/2016 5:20 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
Chuck,
>
>Lets be concrete... anything wrong with patch [1]?
Yes. It is missing Acked-by: lines from the maintainers of
those files.
All changes to files under net/sunrpc need an Ack from one
of the maintainers listed in MAINTAINERS for that directory,
if
> On Jan 6, 2016, at 9:46 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
>
> On 1/6/2016 4:24 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> Actually, one of Or's for-4.5 devattr patches doesn't appear to have the
>> proper Ack's for the changes under net/sunrpc/xprtrdma either.
>
> Chuck,
>
> Lets be concrete... anything wrong with patc
On 1/6/2016 4:24 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
Actually, one of Or's for-4.5 devattr patches doesn't appear to have the proper
Ack's for the changes under net/sunrpc/xprtrdma either.
Chuck,
Lets be concrete... anything wrong with patch [1]?
Or.
[1] commit e3e45b1 "xprtrdma: Avoid calling ib_query
> On Jan 6, 2016, at 7:15 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 07:01:14AM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> Part of the plan was that Doug's tree would be merged before
>> Bruce's. But the above problem description looks like the
>> maintainer trees were merged into linux-next in
On 1/6/2016 2:15 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
I'm not Doug, but all the recent for 4.5 work is in Dougs tree
at
https://github.com/dledford/linux rdma/k.o/for-4.5
Christoph,
As I wrote here, the bits are already @ kernel.org
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dledford/rdm
On 1/6/2016 2:01 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
what is the URL for the branch I should rebase on?
k.o/for-4.5 on Doug's kernel.org tree
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.k
On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 02:22:41PM +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> As I wrote here, the bits are already @ kernel.org
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dledford/rdma.git k.o/for-4.5
Ok, that's a little confusing.
Doug, any chance you could settle on one tree? I don't really care
which
> On Jan 6, 2016, at 7:01 AM, Chuck Lever wrote:
>
>
>> On Jan 4, 2016, at 2:36 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 03, 2016 at 09:53:20PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2016 08:44 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 13:30:22 +1100 Stephen
On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 07:01:14AM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> Part of the plan was that Doug's tree would be merged before
> Bruce's. But the above problem description looks like the
> maintainer trees were merged into linux-next in the other order.
>
> I'd like to make this simpler for everyone.
> On Jan 4, 2016, at 2:36 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 03, 2016 at 09:53:20PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
>> On 01/03/2016 08:44 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 13:30:22 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
>>> wrote:
Hi Doug,
Today's l
On Sun, Jan 03, 2016 at 09:53:20PM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
> On 01/03/2016 08:44 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 13:30:22 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Doug,
> >>
> >> Today's linux-next merge of the rdma tree got conflicts in a quite a
> >
On 01/03/2016 08:44 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 13:30:22 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Doug,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the rdma tree got conflicts in a quite a
>> few files between (mostly, I think) commit:
>>
>> 6c7b6d2d442c ("IB: merge str
Hi all,
On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 13:30:22 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the rdma tree got conflicts in a quite a
> few files between (mostly, I think) commit:
>
> 6c7b6d2d442c ("IB: merge struct ib_device_attr into struct ib_device")
>
> from the nfsd
17 matches
Mail list logo
