Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 29 Oct 2021 08:55:24 -0700
From:   "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
        Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>,
        device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
        linux-xfs <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux NVDIMM <nvdimm@lists.linux.dev>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org,
        linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: futher decouple DAX from block devices
Message-ID: <20211029155524.GE24307@magnolia>
References: <20211018044054.1779424-1-hch@lst.de>
 <CAPcyv4iEt78-XSsKjTWcpy71zaduXyyigTro6f3fmRqqFOG98Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20211029105139.1194bb7f@canb.auug.org.au>
 <CAPcyv4g8iEyN5UN1w1xBqQDYSb3HCh7_smsmjt-PiHORRK+X9Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4g8iEyN5UN1w1xBqQDYSb3HCh7_smsmjt-PiHORRK+X9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 08:42:29AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 4:52 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 13:46:31 -0700 Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > My merge resolution is here [1]. Christoph, please have a look. The
> > > rebase and the merge result are both passing my test and I'm now going
> > > to review the individual patches. However, while I do that and collect
> > > acks from DM and EROFS folks, I want to give Stephen a heads up that
> > > this is coming. Primarily I want to see if someone sees a better
> > > strategy to merge this, please let me know, but if not I plan to walk
> > > Stephen and Linus through the resolution.
> >
> > It doesn't look to bad to me (however it is a bit late in the cycle :-(
> > ).  Once you are happy, just put it in your tree (some of the conflicts
> > are against the current -rc3 based version of your tree anyway) and I
> > will cope with it on Monday.
> 
> Christoph, Darrick, Shiyang,
> 
> I'm losing my nerve to try to jam this into v5.16 this late in the
> cycle.

Always a solid choice to hold off for a little more testing and a little
less anxiety. :)

I don't usually accept new code patches for iomap after rc4 anyway.

> I do want to get dax+reflink squared away as soon as possible,
> but that looks like something that needs to build on top of a
> v5.16-rc1 at this point. If Linus does a -rc8 then maybe it would have
> enough soak time, but otherwise I want to take the time to collect the
> acks and queue up some more follow-on cleanups to prepare for
> block-less-dax.

I think that hwpoison-calls-xfs-rmap patchset is a prerequisite for
dax+reflink anyway, right?  /me had concluded both were 5.17 things.

--D