Message-ID: <b2755703b7823eb26f282218ef29362b.squirrel@webmail.raithlin.com>
In-Reply-To: <365e0b2b-06b1-dc0b-a9ae-dc901ca98d6a@fb.com>
References: <1481914491-21456-1-git-send-email-sbates@raithlin.com>
    <365e0b2b-06b1-dc0b-a9ae-dc901ca98d6a@fb.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 13:37:46 -0600
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] nvme: Improvements in sysfs entry for NVMe CMBs
From: "Stephen Bates" <sbates@raithlin.com>
To: "Jens Axboe" <axboe@fb.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org, james_p_freyensee@linux.intel.com,
        sagi@grimberg.me, jonathan.derrick@intel.com
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.5.2 [SVN]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 541
Lines: 16

>> Jens I based this off v4.9 because for some reason your for-4.10/block
>> is missing my original CMB commit (202021c1a63c6)?
>
> for-4.10/block was forked off v4.9-rc1, and that patch didn't make it in
> until v4.9-rc2. Since for-4.10/block has been merged, any patches for this
> series or next should be based on my for-linus, or just master.
>
> Assuming these two apply directly to master as well?
>
>

Ah thanks for clearing up my confusion ;-). Yes, this series applies
cleanly to both your master and for-linus branches.


Stephen