Date:   Mon, 20 Feb 2023 15:12:58 +0000
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com>,
        CIFS <linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Steve French <stfrench@microsoft.com>,
        "Vishal Moola (Oracle)" <vishal.moola@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mm-stable tree with the cifs tree
Message-ID: <Y/ON+ugfcFBdeZ4i@casper.infradead.org>
References: <Y/N8hVWeR3AjssUC@casper.infradead.org>
 <20230220152933.1ab8fa4a@canb.auug.org.au>
 <1676391.1676903381@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1676391.1676903381@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 02:29:41PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> > Doesn't look too bad to me.  Dave's commit is just removing the
> > functions, so it doesn't matter how they're being changed.
> > 
> > The real question in my mind is why for-next is being updated two days
> > before the merge window with new patches.  What's the point in -next
> > if patches are being added at this late point?
> 
> It's more of a transfer of a subset of my iov/splice patches from the
> linux-block tree to the cifs tree.  I thought Jens would've dropped my branch
> from his tree for the moment.

Your iov/splice patches don't conflict.  The part that you snipped says
it's c8859bc0c129 ("cifs: Remove unused code")