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;
Message-ID: <ae675a01-90e6-4af1-6c43-660b3a6c7b72@kernel.dk>
Date:   Fri, 2 Sep 2022 05:49:04 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.1.2
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mm tree with the block tree
To:     John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20220901161722.739d2013@canb.auug.org.au>
 <1a6632f1-5e23-5fb3-1af2-6d653e4338d4@nvidia.com>
 <f80623f2-7c19-c121-6eff-f5bb4f1cfc48@kernel.dk>
 <87d96d36-fd13-2268-122b-fea806090942@nvidia.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
In-Reply-To: <87d96d36-fd13-2268-122b-fea806090942@nvidia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 9/2/22 1:02 AM, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 9/1/22 07:10, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> So I see two obvious solutions. Either:
>>>
>>> a) Only do the first two patches for now, and leave them in Andrew's
>>> tree. After the next release, do the remaining 5 patches via the block
>>> tree, or
>>>
>>> b) Move the whole series to the block tree now, or
>>>
>>> c) something else?
>>>
>>> Andrew, Jens, any preference here? 
>>
>> Would've been cleaner to take through the block tree given what
>> it touches, imho. Or at least base on that, so we'd avoid frivolous
>> conflicts like this.
>>
> 
> OK, so I'm new to block, and my first guess at the right git tree
> and branch:
> 
>     git://git.kernel.dk/linux-block block-6.0
> 
>  doesn't seem to contain this one:
> 
>     e88811bc43b9 ("block: use on-stack page vec for <= UIO_FASTIOV")
> 
> Can you point me to the right tree please?

That's because block-6.0 contains fixes for 6.0, it's not a 6.1 tree.
for-6.1/block is the pending 6.1 items, and for-next contains all my
branches merged for linux-next consumption.

> Once I know the right block tree to use, I could post the next version
> rebased on top of that. And plan to send it up through Jens' block tree,
> assuming that it continues to survive the reviews, that is.
> 
> Andrew, is that OK with you? The first two patches will still get
> reviewed by mm, and they shouldn't conflict with mm, even if they
> go up through the block tree.

We can just make it a separate topic branch too, I often do that for
various items that are separate in nature and has overlap.

-- 
Jens Axboe