Re: [PATCH net-next 00/12] fscache: Fixes, traces and development
On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 12:28 PM, David Howells wrote: > > That's okay with all the patches as follow up emails? Actually, I generally just look at the git tree and don't need the individual patches at all, at least as long as they are only to a particular subsystem. So if your git tree only touches fs/afs/ and fs/fscache/, just the pull request email alone is sufficient. It's only when people start touching core code or do cross-subsystem things that I appreciate actually seeing the patches separated out. In fact, even then it's generally fine to just point to the git tree and just mention the patches that extend out of just the pure subsystem (and why they do so). Both your afs and fscache pulls looked fine to me, and didn't have that issue (ok, the fscache one touches 9p and afs too, but those are "afs and 9p use fscache", so it's not something that made me go "Hmm..". Linus
Re: [PATCH net-next 00/12] fscache: Fixes, traces and development
Linus Torvalds wrote: > So if you have that [GIT PULL] in the subject line, the pulls will > often be a bit timelier. That's okay with all the patches as follow up emails? David
Re: [PATCH net-next 00/12] fscache: Fixes, traces and development
On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 11:21 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > No, but if you can redo the pull request part so that the diffstat I > get will match the diffstat I see in the pull request, that would be > good. Oh, and can you please make sure there is a "[GIT PULL]" in the subject line for your pull requests? Particularly during the merge window (not so much later) I end up having a separate filtered list of emails that I look at that mention "git pull". Your pull requests don't seem to match that, so your pull requests don't actually even show up in my list of pending pull requests. That doesn't mean that they get lost - it just tends to mean that I don't necessarily see them during my busiest days of pulling. I usually start my days off looking at emails in general, so I see discussions and I see your emails, but then when I start actually pulling I go to that list of pending pull requests, and never actually pull your stuff. That all changes the second week of the merge window when I generally don't have a separate list of pull requests at all (because I've gotten through the big pile of pending stuff), so the pull *does* eventually happen, but it kind of gets delayed. For example, yesterday when I was doing filesystem pulls (I try to often group "similar areas" together), I did nfsd and f2fs. I would have done your afs and fscache pulls while at it, but they didn't show up in my pull request list, so I didn't.. So if you have that [GIT PULL] in the subject line, the pulls will often be a bit timelier. (Again, this is mainly just an issue for the merge window, but it certainly doesn't hurt at other times). Linus
Re: [PATCH net-next 00/12] fscache: Fixes, traces and development
On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 7:44 AM, David Howells wrote: > Hi Linus, > > I've fixed a bug in the final patch that was found by the kbuild test robot > and disabled a debugging statement in an earlier one. This is now tagged as: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dhowells/linux-fs.git > tags/fscache-next-20180406 > > Do you want me to repost the patchset? No, but if you can redo the pull request part so that the diffstat I get will match the diffstat I see in the pull request, that would be good. Thanks, Linus
Re: [PATCH net-next 00/12] fscache: Fixes, traces and development
Hi Linus, I've fixed a bug in the final patch that was found by the kbuild test robot and disabled a debugging statement in an earlier one. This is now tagged as: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dhowells/linux-fs.git tags/fscache-next-20180406 Do you want me to repost the patchset? David
Re: [PATCH net-next 00/12] fscache: Fixes, traces and development
> Subject: [PATCH net-next 00/12] fscache: Fixes, traces and development Apologies: that shouldn't say net-next in there. Cut'n'paste error. David
