On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 02:55:43AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
quoted text
> On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 18:58:10 +0530 "Amit K. Arora" <aarora@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > N O T E: 
> > -------
> > 1) Only Patches 4/7 and 7/7 are NEW. Rest of them are _already_ part
> >    of ext4 patch queue git tree hosted by Ted.
> 
> Why the heck are replacements for these things being sent out again when
> they're already in -mm and they're already in Ted's queue (from which I
> need to diligently drop them each time I remerge)?
> 
> Are we all supposed to re-review the entire patchset (or at least #4 and
> #7) again?

As I mentioned in the note above, only patches #4 and #7 were new and
thus these needed to be reviewed. Other patches are _not_ replacements
of any of the patches which are already part of -mm and/or in Ted's
patch queue. They were posted again as just "placeholders" so that the
two new patches (#4 & #7) could be reviewed. Sorry for any confusion.
 
quoted text
> Please drop the non-ext4 patches from the ext4 tree and send incremental
> patches against the (non-ext4) fallocate patches in -mm.

Please let us know what you think of Mingming's suggestion of posting
all the fallocate patches including the ext4 ones as incremental ones
against the -mm.

--
Regards,
Amit Arora
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/