From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932226AbeE3Ti4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2018 15:38:56 -0400 Received: from mail-it0-f67.google.com ([209.85.214.67]:36036 "EHLO mail-it0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932094AbeE3Tiw (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2018 15:38:52 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKK2Rgn+3wONEHqKYYnSaXBMCF7zx1VpHMIecRhzsh+qMaY9+NOYwKOaTq5MyNyz+E7RmszzOg== Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] convert block layer to bioset_init()/mempool_init() To: Mike Snitzer Cc: Kent Overstreet , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, colyli@suse.de, darrick.wong@oracle.com, clm@fb.com, bacik@fb.com, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, neilb@suse.com References: <20180521144703.GA19303@redhat.com> <4b343aef-e11c-73ba-1d88-7e73ca838cad@kernel.dk> <20180521150439.GA19379@redhat.com> <61e30dcf-a01c-f47d-087a-12930caf9aef@kernel.dk> <20180521151817.GA19454@redhat.com> <20180521160907.GA19553@redhat.com> <20180530133629.GC5157@redhat.com> <20180530193707.GB6568@redhat.com> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <5f32b2e7-859b-42f9-c726-115ba5ff22a9@kernel.dk> Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 13:38:49 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180530193707.GB6568@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/30/18 1:37 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > On Wed, May 30 2018 at 2:55pm -0400, > Jens Axboe wrote: > >> On 5/30/18 7:36 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote: >>> So revisiting this patchset: are you inclined to take these changes (I >>> assume yes)? If so, what would you need in order to get them staged for >>> 4.18? I'll start with offering my review in reply to the DM patch. I'd >>> much prefer to see this level of change go in sooner rather than later. >> >> Yeah I'd like to take the changes, but we might have to wait for >> 4.19 at this point. It'd certainly help to have the dm bits reviewed, >> as they are some of the larger ones. The grunt of the others are mostly >> trivial and smaller in scope. > > I _really_ would like to see this land for 4.18. It'll avoid downstream > backport problems (due to all the churn in this patchset). > > As I'm sure you've seen I reviewed and Acked-by the DM patch. > > I mentioned I've been chatting with Kent, he is available if anything > needs a v2 for whatever reason. > > Would you be OK adding a single sentence description to each driver's > patch header (rather than leaving empty like how Kent submitted)? Or > should Kent resubmit the entire set with that boilerplate header for > each patch? See previous email for both questions :) -- Jens Axboe