Hi!

On Mon 09-05-16 21:28:06, Verma, Vishal L wrote:

On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 23:35 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
I've noticed that patches 1 through 12 of your series are relatively
independent, and are probably more stable than the remaining part of
the series that actually changes locking.

Yes.

My dax error handling series also depends on the patches that change
zeroing in DAX (patches 5, 6, 9).

To allow the error handling stuff to move faster, can we split these
into two patchsets?

I was hoping to send the dax error handling series through the nvdimm
tree, and if you'd like, I can also prepend your patches 1-12 with my
series.

So I'm thinking how to best merge this. There are some ext4 patches which
are not trivial (mainly "ext4: Refactor direct IO code"). These can go in
as far as I'm concerned but there is a potential for conflicts in ext4
tree and I'd definitely want to give them full test run in the ext4 tree.
The best what I can think of is to pull ext4 related changes into a stable
branch in ext4 tree and then pull that branch into nvdimm tree. Ted, what
do you think? If you agree, I can separate the patches into three parts -
one for ext4 tree, stable patches for nvdimm tree, and then remaining
patches.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara [off-list ref]
SUSE Labs, CR

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>