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;
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
To:     Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk>,
        Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] block: remove last remaining traces of IDE
 documentation
In-Reply-To: <YnVgxEcRTQPu/DHE@equinox>
References: <20220427132436.12795-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
 <20220427132436.12795-4-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
 <87wnfaa8ce.fsf@meer.lwn.net> <20220427165917.GE12977@windriver.com>
 <YmsmnGb3JNjH54Xb@equinox> <20220506153241.GH12977@windriver.com>
 <YnVgxEcRTQPu/DHE@equinox>
Date:   Mon, 09 May 2022 16:17:31 -0600
Message-ID: <87bkw6cpvo.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk> writes:

> I was yes, the point I was trying to make (poorly) is that your patch
> conflicts with Randy's patch which itself is not yet in linux-next, as
> normally I send everything together at the start of the merge window to
> Jens, as I don't have my own kernel.org tree yet, and usually I only get
> one or two patches in a cycle anyway.
>
> This is not your fault, you couldn't have been expected to know this in
> retrospect, and I should probably look into getting my own tree/GPG key
> sorted to alleviate this problem in future.
>
> In the meantime, if you're comfortable with the idea, I can just resolve
> the conflict myself when I send the patches onto Jens this time and
> include patch 3/3 pre-fixed up. Merge window will be fairly soon anyway.

So I'm a little confused by the state of everything at this point, but
I'm assuming that I need not worry about taking these changes through
docs-next.  Please let me know if that's not correct.

Thanks,

jon