From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF436C07E96 for ; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 19:15:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1BEF61183 for ; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 19:15:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234540AbhGMTSY (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jul 2021 15:18:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53636 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234172AbhGMTSX (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jul 2021 15:18:23 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x133.google.com (mail-lf1-x133.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::133]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDCF2C0613E9 for ; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 12:15:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x133.google.com with SMTP id y42so52264387lfa.3 for ; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 12:15:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=M18otY56PpJwNrQJZprVka1qTQakvoKBClejDnSkTrE=; b=Rw5P0JTho1kjLZqea6CQ8gUagVJNs4k3emejx1WscQgRmsreZEOQiJc8y++sSNzf0m yUK2cGVT6b3RBD//TAYSElF0ZPAUW145ztuAEdq517sQsSfp0z+NSo1QNXrpyx8J+aXd SWZpFinMKDaD5pO2gHyIUWmKwlMrim3t2qYNM= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=M18otY56PpJwNrQJZprVka1qTQakvoKBClejDnSkTrE=; b=HREEsVJetJiUCbQk2U+VuPJ4yaKmPtP0OQp/cAYBVxaoZrjdPMMBAqBY0UeLAekCMm K3n4fsx/eDhs7hycsXe7YEmrQt3svzofK3KsTmH0GPDK9Q7Hp9/8iv/+/ed+hPuIDv7Q RJD+oB6CPZL1ZbUht4nD/AHjcPL5hgeFeaEBpjCOE7qPRv1F7Mc5l3+svxdp3wEuIQT6 KowU2EtKRnOXE5RGleKRJ92p7QAbTG1SRIFGlkVYClsgqe78NDAajtpX1M5Kw5GrUb4R hIaJryYkKKBR9esHHKA7nrIlO7kWp2EzlNPHi1h4dVta8ONnPC5xzcBuodeA55wjdK51 H/LQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531/sfE+zpywo16hZ1x4YRGlboajJZtoFqvv3+It3TYNV2mMai0l EfBRD+1qAtUzzbQM1rF8TBLKKXB6xWaj0IA9EoU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwLratuqwwlxGS6YHSNzwAxpbgry2rN7PIs8wb7gsBo2+v8Mwi/jfosNOFHiEQE96hsDzBr4Q== X-Received: by 2002:a19:8509:: with SMTP id h9mr4599695lfd.582.1626203729872; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 12:15:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-f45.google.com (mail-lf1-f45.google.com. [209.85.167.45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w19sm2032220ljw.138.2021.07.13.12.15.29 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 13 Jul 2021 12:15:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-f45.google.com with SMTP id b26so19864812lfo.4 for ; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 12:15:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a19:7d04:: with SMTP id y4mr4501282lfc.201.1626203729021; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 12:15:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <30c7ec73-4ad5-3c4e-4745-061eb22f2c8a@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <30c7ec73-4ad5-3c4e-4745-061eb22f2c8a@redhat.com> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 12:15:13 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] vboxsf fixes for 5.14-1 To: Hans de Goede Cc: linux-fsdevel , Alexander Viro , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 3:45 AM Hans de Goede wrote: > > Linus, sorry for sending this directly through you, instead of going > through some other tree, but trying to get this upstream through the > linux-fsdevel list / patch-review simply is not working. Well, the filesystem maintainer sending their patches to me as a pull request is actually the norm rather than the exception when it comes to filesystems. It's a bit different for drivers, but that's because while we have multiple filesystems, we have multiple _thousand_ drivers, so on the driver side I really don't want individual driver maintainers to all send me their individual pull requests - that just wouldn't scale. So for individual drivers, we have subsystem maintainers, but for individual filesystems we generally don't. (When something then touches the *common* vfs code, that's a different thing - but something like this vboxsf thing this pull request looks normal to me). Even with a maintainer sending me pull requests I do obviously prefer to see indications that other people have acked/tested/reviewed the patches, but this is fairly small, simple and straightforward, and absolutely nothing in this pull request makes me go "oh, that's sketchy". So no need to apologize at all, this all looks very regular. Linus