Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 21 Apr 2022 17:46:53 +1000
From:   Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-xfs <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux NVDIMM <nvdimm@lists.linux.dev>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
        Jane Chu <jane.chu@oracle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 0/7] fsdax: introduce fs query to support reflink
Message-ID: <20220421074653.GT1544202@dread.disaster.area>
References: <20220419045045.1664996-1-ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com>
 <20220421012045.GR1544202@dread.disaster.area>
 <86cb0ada-208c-02de-dbc9-53c6014892c3@fujitsu.com>
 <CAPcyv4i0Noum8hqHtCpdM5HMVdmNHm3Aj2JCnZ+KZLgceiXYaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220421043502.GS1544202@dread.disaster.area>
 <YmDxs1Hj4H/cu2sd@infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YmDxs1Hj4H/cu2sd@infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 10:54:59PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 02:35:02PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > Sure, I'm not a maintainer and just the stand-in patch shepherd for
> > a single release. However, being unable to cleanly merge code we
> > need integrated into our local subsystem tree for integration
> > testing because a patch dependency with another subsystem won't gain
> > a stable commit ID until the next merge window is .... distinctly
> > suboptimal.
> 
> Yes.  Which is why we've taken a lot of mm patchs through other trees,
> sometimes specilly crafted for that.  So I guess in this case we'll
> just need to take non-trivial dependencies into the XFS tree, and just
> deal with small merge conflicts for the trivial ones.

OK. As Naoyo has pointed out, the first dependency/conflict Ruan has
listed looks trivial to resolve.

The second dependency, OTOH, is on a new function added in the patch
pointed to. That said, at first glance it looks to be independent of
the first two patches in that series so I might just be able to pull
that one patch in and have that leave us with a working
fsdax+reflink tree.

Regardless, I'll wait to see how much work the updated XFS/DAX
reflink enablement patchset still requires when Ruan posts it before
deciding what to do here.  If it isn't going to be a merge
candidate, what to do with this patchset is moot because there's
little to test without reflink enabled...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com