From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98DC3C3A5A6 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 13:15:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6918321924 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 13:15:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="Lm8MDDY/" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732346AbfISNPr (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Sep 2019 09:15:47 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:42854 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732319AbfISNPr (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Sep 2019 09:15:47 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=N3ATsTug9sl7XndvxKEm/a4/GmNoRazh1uwz6q7DYO8=; b=Lm8MDDY/OV67l/pcT6Z3dvK21 C+k/zFe/9t+fscMqP3BQbBEbhnayBgNeXvaGy/w6kTcEV2yIsiyeDwA62SIaxa4buVlzSmlAXC/Zw Oxm4B/P84MzFdBmwFTRRBiqL2TTtXYgmKqhZU9LWQTsREJx7TjZlwkoFzEkeJkq/6XU66MAh9GF67 iM24xGHPY4A3MtHY1052N6QI3XPn7C/NwotwnErbxi66dkYdplJfgwA74UHV52dPm08htzv+VPjUY CEC2bJribMg5+CpP7MVNMV9AuQX0r1UwwCxBOVoPgnY0Lk+iEJDnhXBYzjxMIUIo2zN1HIj83yhMo ZW8oWr0sw==; Received: from willy by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.92.2 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1iAwHZ-0002qj-HV; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 13:15:39 +0000 Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 06:15:37 -0700 From: Matthew Wilcox To: David Howells Cc: Linus Torvalds , YueHaibing , Marc Dionne , linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [GIT PULL afs: Development for 5.4 Message-ID: <20190919131537.GA15392@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <28368.1568875207@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <16147.1568632167@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <16257.1568886562@warthog.procyon.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <16257.1568886562@warthog.procyon.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 10:49:22AM +0100, David Howells wrote: > David Howells wrote: > > > > However, I was close to unpulling it again. It has a merge commit with > > > this merge message: > > > > > > Merge remote-tracking branch 'net/master' into afs-next > > > > > > and that simply is not acceptable. > > > > Apologies - I meant to rebase that away. There was a bug fix to rxrpc in > > net/master that didn't get pulled into your tree until Saturday. > > Actually, waiting for all outstanding fixes to get merged and then rebasing > might not be the right thing here. The problem is that there are fixes in > both trees: afs fixes go directly into yours whereas rxrpc fixes go via > networking and I would prefer to base my patches on both of them for testing > purposes. What's the preferred method for dealing with that? Base on a merge > of the lastest of those fixes in each tree? Why is it organised this way? I mean, yes, technically, rxrpc is a generic layer-6 protocol that any blah blah blah, but in practice no other user has come up in the last 37 years, so why bother pretending one is going to? Just git mv net/rxrpc fs/afs/ and merge everything through your tree. I feel similarly about net/9p, net/sunrpc and net/ceph. Every filesystem comes with its own presentation layer; nobody reuses an existing one. Just stop pretending they're separate components.