From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ua0-f169.google.com ([209.85.217.169]:35858 "EHLO mail-ua0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932068AbdGCPLq (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Jul 2017 11:11:46 -0400 Received: by mail-ua0-f169.google.com with SMTP id g40so111245411uaa.3 for ; Mon, 03 Jul 2017 08:11:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170629185320.GA31467@lst.de> References: <20170629135420.21357-1-hch@lst.de> <20170629184751.GH5874@birch.djwong.org> <20170629185320.GA31467@lst.de> From: Andreas Gruenbacher Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 17:11:44 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: lseek SEEK_HOLE / SEEK_DATA fixes and switch to iomap V3.2-hch To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , Jan Kara , linux-fsdevel , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 11:47:51AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 06:54:15AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> > Here is my take on all the current seek work. It has my XFS quota changes >> >> I think the quota change patch fell out of this series, but I can grab >> it from the previous iteration if it hasn't changed. > > It hasn't, please do. We haven't heard from the ext4 folks on this yet: is everyone happy with the vfs changes in this series at least? Can those be merged through the xfs tree? That would allow us to move ahead on the gfs2 side. Thanks, Andreas