From: Theodore Tso Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] fs/jbd/journal.c: cleanups Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 08:28:58 -0500 Message-ID: <20080218132858.GA12568@mit.edu> References: <20080217081935.GN3848@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> <20080218070439.GG3029@webber.adilger.int> <20080218071229.GA1459@elte.hu> <20080218114936.GM8905@mit.edu> <20080218131209.GB21080@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Ingo Molnar , Andreas Dilger , sct@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Adrian Bunk Return-path: Received: from www.church-of-our-saviour.org ([69.25.196.31]:37048 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752488AbYBRN3d (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2008 08:29:33 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080218131209.GB21080@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 03:12:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > If me resending this old patch collides with something finally getting a > user this part of my patch shouldn't be applied now (but you might get > it again in 6 months if it's still unused...). > > But generally such conflicts would become visible if "known development > trees that are intended for mainline" were in -mm. It *has* been in -mm, except for periods when akpm has dropped it due to conflicts due to the "must have an in-tree user" doctrinaire attitude due to a conflict with the r/o bind patch. Did you actually try to do a compile test, or only made sure the patch would apply? The patch won't collide at application time, but it would when you compile it.... - Ted