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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] netfs: Fix gcc-12 warning by embedding vfs inode in
 netfs_i_context
To:     Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc:     keescook@chromium.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com>,
        Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@ionkov.net>,
        Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@codewreck.org>,
        Christian Schoenebeck <linux_oss@crudebyte.com>,
        Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@auristor.com>,
        Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>,
        Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com>,
        William Kucharski <william.kucharski@oracle.com>,
        "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
        linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, samba-technical@lists.samba.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <1b5daa4695b62795b617049e32c784052deabad4.camel@kernel.org>
 <165305805651.4094995.7763502506786714216.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <658391.1653302817@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <e4fcdf88a9b35a9f1ca6e75fdf75ad469f824380.camel@kernel.org>
From:   Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <9945711f-c786-2300-9854-ee7734024a2c@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 May 2022 17:50:54 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.10.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <e4fcdf88a9b35a9f1ca6e75fdf75ad469f824380.camel@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Precedence: bulk


On 5/23/22 7:05 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-05-23 at 11:46 +0100, David Howells wrote:
>> Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Note that there are some conflicts between this patch and some of the
>>> patches in the current ceph-client/testing branch. Depending on the
>>> order of merge, one or the other will need to be fixed.
>> Do you think it could be taken through the ceph tree?
>>
>> David
>>
> Since this touches a lot of non-ceph code, it may be best to just plan
> to merge it ASAP, and we'll just base our merge branch on top of it.
>
> Ilya/Xiubo, do you have an opinion here?
>   

Yeah, agree with Jeff.