Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757561AbcCCVLo (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2016 16:11:44 -0500 Received: from mail-io0-f175.google.com ([209.85.223.175]:34564 "EHLO mail-io0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752787AbcCCVLm (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2016 16:11:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20160303172516.GA24567@kernel.dk> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 13:11:41 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: GLKsQx3LEexCrNlMTCySKZhjrQg Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Block fixes for 4.5-final From: Linus Torvalds To: Jens Axboe Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-block@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1214 Lines: 28 On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Feel free to resend the parts that are actually critical, but explain > exactly why they are so critical when you do. Just to clarify: anything that contains "lightnvm" is definitely not critical enough. Are there even any users? I'm done seeing these constant large lightnvm patches. NVMe is certainly a lot more important, but if it's about hot unplug that has never been reliable before, or about cleaning up the reset sequence by avoiding unmapping the register space, I really don't see what makes those critical patches that should go in outside of the merge window. So no more of this "several hundred lines of random code changes after rc6 for issues that aren't fixing an actual critical bug and has never worked before either". The block pull request was literally three times the size of all the other (*seven*) pull requests I've done today that were actually small fixes. Yeah, I'm not going to say that all of those were necessarily truly critical either, but at least they were very small and clearly fixes, and several of them fixed things like actual BUG_ON's or boot hangs. Linus