From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23A252D6E69; Tue, 7 Oct 2025 12:07:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759838821; cv=none; b=on1t4WFrABfTIQH2S0knxUwkCcjZFBcvpT0hhVgeE4jyiHhdmmFIa85aKL5aCTzdn+F/BHq+YWHlx3MvFgJWhippZLivS0CVPz+oBYCQaR51CIFa+3oRcTFptG6z4J/8h+c3R0jOTh5LYuGGdeQD6Efc8gRnPE4Mrr+T8AcPFrU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759838821; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0IWs7kEP3eKS5Z9wqVChLMltcpO4tLuL21+2Ep/aRHc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=KwVvW4I7Hbb8Ik0B2b3yg2ld9d1AZnngKL7hybE4DY2C6V/4bB4u8mFR9Ije3BWzrq1w+swRuuSHjtJWz+OpyZShq4KSatMJdy/b347SZhqARXETfr856T2iq9BeiVslpniCUg6EEE/Qj925h5LKNjUVEBTMdQ1DR+hu3YNiCJQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=GjdxudqE; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="GjdxudqE" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CD920C4CEF1; Tue, 7 Oct 2025 12:06:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1759838820; bh=0IWs7kEP3eKS5Z9wqVChLMltcpO4tLuL21+2Ep/aRHc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=GjdxudqEbWm/WCfG6PKFO1V7CH/ZRRQ5Upb0LCBnT1wOJ3fWR1tCv9HE685m+ZJSW L8PuysWejHCHKcjDsN5r/XoQJ2fWc8pC6FZHLLYNRZaSGN2P+Upn7eqfnDInN8zAxK sWrWxJczU85Zkp3Sa3ZlMCqjOdvRTCD/lu8kFp1s1ja0wAazP+UqYrtdVi5v/jw4oj ERBINLtM8hBXtGAlvUnks4PAgITu8QU/fBN3+0RsFEkXFocHSHqdFgNFdccrOhzbbY K8QqZkiyRKDEziy9WY6QIuirZf3SSOZH/t8Mt85hkHh6+eR5L9E0AiiY43zmP5QvcN 3D6hs/GUunMqQ== Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2025 14:06:56 +0200 From: Christian Brauner To: Jeff Layton Cc: Chuck Lever , Linus Torvalds , Johannes Berg , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] NFSD changes for v6.18 Message-ID: <20251007-ausholen-wohlklang-832361d2e995@brauner> References: <20251006135010.2165-1-cel@kernel.org> <26c34ef2-8309-4625-9bee-bb3e5c056568@kernel.org> <20251007-zoodirektor-widder-27776d2e7228@brauner> <39f56bc6833c6e25ac94cce6eba8eec3267ab5f6.camel@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <39f56bc6833c6e25ac94cce6eba8eec3267ab5f6.camel@kernel.org> On Tue, Oct 07, 2025 at 07:47:39AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Tue, 2025-10-07 at 13:26 +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 06, 2025 at 04:58:22PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > > > On 10/6/25 4:51 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > On Mon, 6 Oct 2025 at 06:50, Chuck Lever wrote: > > > > > > > > > > One potential merge conflict has been reported for nfsd-6.18. > > > > > > > > No problem, this is the simple kind of explicit conflict (famous last > > > > words before I mess one of those things up). > > > > > > > > Anyway, the reason I'm replying is actually that I notice that you > > > > added that ATTR_CTIME_SET flag in in commit afc5b36e29b9 > > > > ("vfs: add ATTR_CTIME_SET flag"). > > > > > > > > No complaints about it, but it looks a bit odd with ATTR_{A,M}TIME_SET > > > > in bits 7 and 8, and then the new ATTR_CTIME_SET is in bit 10 with the > > > > entirely unrelated ATTR_FORCE in between them all. > > > > > > Oof. We should have gotten Acks for "vfs: add ATTR_CTIME_SET flag". My > > > bad. > > > > Yes, indeed. I wondered why I hadn't seen this patch. > > > > I did send it to fsdevel, but you may have missed it in the deluge. Mea > culpa from me too -- I should have noticed that you guys hadn't acked > this yet. Any objection? No, it looks sane overally. I think we should renumber. Frankly, I would also prefer for stuff like this to be enums. It makes debugging for stuff like drgn that people use easier and imho also looks nicer in the code. But that's a matter of taste. And the renumbering might be the bigger win as Linus suggested.