From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-lb0-f169.google.com ([209.85.217.169]:36444 "EHLO
	mail-lb0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751217AbcBVQU7 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 22 Feb 2016 11:20:59 -0500
Received: by mail-lb0-f169.google.com with SMTP id x1so84916478lbj.3
        for <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 08:20:58 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160220133651.GG17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <alpine.BSO.2.20.1602181449280.29280@server1.sysblue.org>
	<CAOg9mSSRebK0WMQHVD3Ne7R0+sdzO+o-mJcxX626X6UzEFsPpg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOg9mST9mPefWaWNqXieuQQeLdLDXOtS3atk_+JzJXX9G6b+gg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOg9mSRWeNV_DbRw1Zn2XzwW+7ORWcYLj85P-3rvZ0YisLzT9g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160218205206.GW17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
	<CAOg9mSQQCATxLS0qoKrs-k3HktquBtNRQsCA6ePeDSyW-cT2bg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160219002539.GX17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
	<CAOg9mSRVD6W7yW_Usa5945cOHPsvFHvzj9fjoEHRj+u+fDX0ZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160219222221.GB17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
	<CAOg9mSSAd-YGXc7Xns5iOaV=ot6BOpr5V+Ya9dPdEN=nFHyfJg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160220133651.GG17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 11:20:57 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOg9mSR4LPU_RwXuRtw+e9sbS_HkBui5VYWgqdF9k26fHfORXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Orangefs ABI documentation
From: Mike Marshall <hubcap@omnibond.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Martin Brandenburg <martin@omnibond.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Mike Marshall <hubcap@omnibond.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

 > Looks like I'd screwed up checking last time.

Probably not that <g>... my branch did diverge over the course
of the few days that we were thrashing around in the kernel trying
to fix what I had broken two years ago in userspace.

I can relate to why you were motivated to remove the thrashing
around from the git history, but your git-foo is much stronger
than mine. I wanted to try and get my branch back into line using
a methodology that I understand to keep from ending up like
this fellow:

http://myweb.clemson.edu/~hubcap/harris.jpg

I'm glad it worked out... my kernel.org for-next branch is updated now.

so, I'll keep working the problem, using your d_drop idea first off...
I'll be back with more information, and hopefully even have it fixed, soon...

-Mike

On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 07:14:26AM -0500, Mike Marshall wrote:
>
>> Your orangefs-untested branch has 5625087 commits. My "current" branch
>> has 5625087 commits. In each all of the commit signatures match, except
>> for the most recent 15 commits. The last 15 commits in my "current"
>> branch were made from your orangefs-untested branch with "git format-patch"
>> and applied to my "current" branch with "git am -s". "git log -p" shows that
>> my most recent 15 commits differ from your most recent 15 commits by
>> the addition of my "sign off" line.
>
> *blinks*
> *checks*
>
> OK, ignore what I asked, then.  Looks like I'd screwed up checking last time.
>
>> I will absolutely update my kernel.org for-next branch with the procedure you
>> outlined, because you said so.
>>
>> I wish I understood it better, though... I can only guess at this point that
>> the procedure you outlined will do some desirable thing to git metadata...?
>
> None whatsoever, ignore it.