From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [pnfs] [PATCHSET 00/12 repost] nfsd: #includes cleanup Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 14:01:06 -0500 Message-ID: <20091203190106.GB3317@fieldses.org> References: <4B1802D0.8060206@panasas.com> <4B18054F.3080902@panasas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: NFS list , pNFS Mailing List To: Boaz Harrosh Return-path: Received: from fieldses.org ([174.143.236.118]:37752 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756579AbZLCTAB (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Dec 2009 14:00:01 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4B18054F.3080902@panasas.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 08:37:03PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > On 12/03/2009 08:26 PM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > > > > Hi Bruce > > > > I'm reposting the all set together > > > > There are two patches that people have said will go through > > other trees (see below). So either wait with patch 12/12 after > > they get into Linus. Or also submit them through nfsd, it should > > not cause any problems to post the same patch from two sub-trees, > > right? > > > > (For the things done here please let it sit in linux-next for > > a couple of nights) > > > > Bruce, these are based on for-2.6.33 branch from your tree > but I just realize that your "-next" branch is more advanced > > Must I rebase? (But only Sunday it's getting late down here) No, for-2.6.33 is the right one to work against. Thanks! (I'm keeping two main branches with pending patches: for-2.6.x: this is stuff I've committed. I never rewind/rebase this branch. This is almost always the branch to work against. for-2.6.x-next: this everything in for-2.6.x, plus stuff I'm expecting to commit soon, but may be waiting for review or may still need minor tweaks. I may rewind this branch. I wouldn't recommend working against it. This is the branch that's pulled into linux-next. ) --b. > > Boaz > > [PATCH 01/12] nfsd: Remove nfsfh.h dependency on sunrpc > > [PATCH 02/12] sunrpc: Clean never used include files > > [PATCH 03/12] nfsd: Fix independence of a few nfsd related headers > > [PATCH 04/12] nfsd: Headers Independence and include cleanups > > [PATCH 05/12] nfsd: Source files #include cleanups > > > > First batch > > > > [PATCH 06/12] compat.c: Remove dependence on nfsd private headers > > [PATCH 07/12] parsic: remove un-used nfsd #includes > > > > This patch we have ACK on > > > > [PATCH 08/12] sparc: remove un-used nfsd #includes > > [PATCH 09/12] s390: remove un-used nfsd #includes > > > > These two were reported as submitted into ARCH tree for 2.6.33 > > > > [PATCH 10/12] lockd: Remove un-used nfsd headers #includes > > [PATCH 11/12] vfs: nfsctl.c un-used nfsd #includes > > > > [PATCH 12/12] nfsd: Move private headers to source directory > > > > this patch is the only one that depends on all > > the other parts, and need all patches in. > > (And will cause Benny's tree to adjust) > > > > Thanks > > Boaz > > > > _______________________________________________ > > pNFS mailing list > > pNFS@linux-nfs.org > > http://linux-nfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pnfs >