Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161057AbVKDE6N (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Nov 2005 23:58:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161053AbVKDE6N (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Nov 2005 23:58:13 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:48810 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161052AbVKDE6M (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Nov 2005 23:58:12 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 20:58:02 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: zach.brown@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, mark.fasheh@oracle.com Subject: Re: [Patch] add AOP_TRUNCATED_PAGE, prepend AOP_ to WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE Message-Id: <20051103205802.31121fc4.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20051103165306.GA4923@infradead.org> References: <43667913.4030401@oracle.com> <20051103124536.0191bea6.akpm@osdl.org> <20051103074312.GQ11488@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <20051103165306.GA4923@infradead.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1588 Lines: 34 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 11:43:12PM -0800, Joel Becker wrote: > > > Looks sane to me. Can you carry this in the ocfs2 tree? > > > > No problem. Give us a day or two to merge the changes to our > > main trees. > > I think I disagree with Andew here. Having a core patch separate > from a new drivers/filesystem/etc.. is always a good idea. It makes > reviewing a lot easier and allows independant handling, e.g. merging it > earlier than the new driver for some reason - as happened for example > with the clear_inode changes we needed earlier for ocfs or the pagevec > exports that came in via the reiser4 patches but were needed in mainline > for cifs now. Yes, that's better from a code staging/reviewing pov. But there's a practical problem: if I put the patch in -mm for testing, and the ocfs2 guys put the patch into their git tree for their testing, I get rejects. So I drop the core patch from -mm again. If the ocfs guys _dont_ put the patch into their tree, they need to add this additional patch for their testing. It's all screwed up. So for both -mm and for the ocfs2 team, leaving the patch in the ocfs2 git tree is the most convenient place for it. Obviously, merging it into Linus's tree will fix up everyone's patching problems, but it has no users at this time... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/