From: Theodore Tso Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix #11321: create /proc/ext4/*/stats et al more carefully Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 14:24:57 -0400 Message-ID: <20080909182457.GS21071@mit.edu> References: <20080905210652.GE11569@x200.localdomain> <20080906075713.GM3086@webber.adilger.int> <20080907121557.GA3432@x200.localdomain> <20080907162447.GB32429@mit.edu> <20080907164130.GA3376@x200.localdomain> <20080908143951.GH8161@mit.edu> <20080909070630.GC5786@x200.localdomain> <20080909001203.7480549e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080909130900.GS8161@mit.edu> <20080909111006.cc8aae89.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Alexey Dobriyan , Ralf Hildebrandt , Andreas Dilger , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Morton Return-path: Received: from BISCAYNE-ONE-STATION.MIT.EDU ([18.7.7.80]:62709 "EHLO biscayne-one-station.mit.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754209AbYIISZp (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 14:25:45 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080909111006.cc8aae89.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 11:10:06AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > "the percpu cleanup patch" is nowhere nearly specific enough to be > useful. I don't know what patch this is. Sorry, I should have been more specific. It's called: percpu-counters-clean-up-percpu_counter_sum_and_set-interface.patch in in your mmotm tree. > If stuff turns up in linux-next then I'll just drop the -mm duplicate > under the assumption that the patch is being taken care of by someone > else. Well, in the past you've been asked me not to include non-ext4 patches in the ext4 tree. So I could include that patch in an ext4 patchset and push it to linux-next, since it *does* involve changes to fs/ext4 as well as to include/linux/percpu_counter.h and lib/percpu_counter.c, if that would be easier. Or we can keep it out of the set of patches I push to Linus, but then we have to worry about patch ordering and dependencies a bit more. > I will usually attempt to verify that the subsystem tree merged > the correct patch. Fairly often they didn't. I've checked, and modulo some minor changelog comment fixups I had made to fix grammar and spelling that I had made to my version of the patch, and the fact that we didn't have your signed-off-by in your version of the patch, the patch we have is identical. I'll reconcile the changelog comments headers on my end, and if you want to keep it in -mm, I'll send them back to you. Otherwise I'll include it in ext4 patches and you can drop it from yours if that's OK with you. Whatever's easier.... - Ted