From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/20] xfs: pass a 64-bit count argument to xfs_iomap_write_unwritten Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 06:24:04 +1100 Message-ID: <20150202192404.GI6282@dastard> References: <1421925006-24231-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <1421925006-24231-17-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20150129205232.GB11064@fieldses.org> <20150202073024.GA9399@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Layton , xfs@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150202073024.GA9399@lst.de> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 08:30:24AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 03:52:32PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > Who can give us ACKs on these last five fs/xfs patches? (And is it > > going to cause trouble if they go in through the nfsd tree?) > > > We'd need ACKs from Dave. He already has pulled in two patches so > we might run into some conflicts. Maybe the best idea is to add the > exportfs patch to both the XFS and nfsd trees, so each of them can > pull in the rest? Or we could commit the two XFS preparation patches > to both tree and get something that compiles and works in the nfsd > tree. This patch has already been committed to the XFS repo. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs