Hi all,
It appears that there are a series of shared patches between the block
and device-mapper trees that are not the same commits. I assume that the
block tree has been rebased, while the device mapper tree that was based
(or includes) part of the block tree has not bee rebased (yet).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On 12/9/18 8:43 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It appears that there are a series of shared patches between the block
> and device-mapper trees that are not the same commits. I assume that the
> block tree has been rebased, while the device mapper tree that was based
> (or includes) part of the block tree has not bee rebased (yet).
Yep that's my fault, due to a stupid mistake I had to rebase the
block tree. Didn't realize that Mike's tree was based on it. Mike,
would it be a big issue for you to rebase the dm tree?
--
Jens Axboe
On Sun, Dec 09 2018 at 10:55pm -0500,
Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 12/9/18 8:43 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > It appears that there are a series of shared patches between the block
> > and device-mapper trees that are not the same commits. I assume that the
> > block tree has been rebased, while the device mapper tree that was based
> > (or includes) part of the block tree has not bee rebased (yet).
>
> Yep that's my fault, due to a stupid mistake I had to rebase the
> block tree. Didn't realize that Mike's tree was based on it. Mike,
> would it be a big issue for you to rebase the dm tree?
No problem, just did it and pushed to linux-dm.git's for-next.
(I was already anticipating rebasing dm's for-next again once the
bio-based percpu in_flight was merged into linux-block, hopefully we can
get that to land)