From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>,
Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] first block round for 2.6.31
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:26:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090611182657.GY11363@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0906111105021.3573@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, Jun 11 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >
> > This is the bulk of the block changes for 2.6.31, please pull.
> >
> > git://git.kernel.dk/linux-2.6-block.git for-2.6.31
>
> Ok, this clashed pretty badly with both the tracing tree (which obviously
> has block tracers) and with my pull ide pull from Bartlomiej (which
> obviously has ide driver changes).
>
> I fixed everything up, and it _looks_ ok, including a "allyesconfig" build
> etc. It wasn't totally trivial, though - in the sense that it's entirely
> possible that I fixed something up incorrectly. Also, in the tracer code,
> I kept the checks for whether something is a "pc" of "fs" request, so it
> now looks like
>
> __entry->sector = blk_pc_request(rq) ? 0 : blk_rq_pos(rq);
>
> and I suspect that it could just be an unconditional
>
> __entry->sector = blk_rq_pos(rq);
>
> instead, but somebody involved with the whole block tracing thing needs to
> check that out.
>
> The ide-tape.c changes also need some expert tender loving checks. I
> neither know the code, nor have the hardware to check my fixups. Almost
> all the changes are actually by the same person - it's almost all Tejun's
> code (and mostly the same patches), just coming in through two different
> trees. Not very nice.
I agree, that part is a mess. Hopefully we wont have this degree of
churn in this area again, but I do wish that we had more block consumers
based off the block tree. Having cross-dependent stuff in different
trees just gets messy quickly. Thanks for resolving it though, the IDE
code wasn't pulled in when I sent the pull request or I would've done it
myself. I usually try to make sure that it merges cleanly with your head
of tree before sending it out.
> Btw, Jens: in your tree, you've committed Tejun's changes without adding
> your own sign-off. Not good!
That's for the patches that I pulled from his git tree. It should list
him as committer too.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-11 18:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-11 11:13 Jens Axboe
2009-06-11 18:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-11 18:26 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2009-06-11 18:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-11 18:52 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-11 19:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-11 20:04 ` Jens Axboe
2009-06-11 19:58 ` Diego Calleja
2009-06-11 20:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-12 6:48 ` Borislav Petkov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090611182657.GY11363@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=srostedt@redhat.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome