Hi Linus,
As per Greg's instructions, this is part 1 of the set of 2 patches. This patch switches inode bitmap allocation to static. The whole set differs from what went into Andrew Morton's trees only by the trivial cleanup (whitespace etc) which is, according to the rules, not appropriate for the stable Linux kernel, hence not included in the set.
The second part will follow in a minute as a separate email.
Kind regards, Tigran
On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 10:20:25AM +0000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
Hi Linus,
As per Greg's instructions, this is part 1 of the set of 2 patches. This patch switches inode bitmap allocation to static. The whole set differs from what went into Andrew Morton's trees only by the trivial cleanup (whitespace etc) which is, according to the rules, not appropriate for the stable Linux kernel, hence not included in the set.
The second part will follow in a minute as a separate email.
Kind regards, Tigran
From: Tigran Aivazian aivazian.tigran@gmail.com Subject: [PATCH 4.19.6 1/2] BFS updates
Please do not attach patches.
Also, you can not submit a patch for a stable release, you have to work against Linus's tree. Please read: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html for how to do this properly.
thanks,
greg k-h
Hello Greg,
On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 at 10:30, Greg KH greg@kroah.com wrote:
Please do not attach patches.
It was done deliberately, because otherwise Gmail would corrupt/wrap the lines.
Also, you can not submit a patch for a stable release, you have to work against Linus's tree. Please read: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html for how to do this properly.
Yes, I have verified (sorry, I forgot to mention that again because I have mentioned this in the original non-split email already) that it can be applied perfectly to the torvalds/linux tree from github. But I thank you for graciously helping me and reminding me about this, of course :)
Kind regards, Tigran
Hello,
I've only now realised what Greg meant about patch being against Linus' tree and not the stable one. Sorry, I originally assumed that Linus' tree is "infinitesimally close" to the latest stable tree and so one can just test it against that, without bothering to recompile github/torvalds/linux tree as well. But now I have corrected my mistake and I thank all of you, especially Linus, for patiently waiting for me to do this without admonishing) and confirm that I have now tested the patch against github/torvalds/linux tree (uname -r says '4.20.0-rc4+') and it works absolutely fine. Therefore, Linus, you can apply it to your tree without any risk.
Kind regards, Tigran
On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 at 10:33, Tigran Aivazian aivazian.tigran@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Greg,
On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 at 10:30, Greg KH greg@kroah.com wrote:
Please do not attach patches.
It was done deliberately, because otherwise Gmail would corrupt/wrap the lines.
Also, you can not submit a patch for a stable release, you have to work against Linus's tree. Please read: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html for how to do this properly.
Yes, I have verified (sorry, I forgot to mention that again because I have mentioned this in the original non-split email already) that it can be applied perfectly to the torvalds/linux tree from github. But I thank you for graciously helping me and reminding me about this, of course :)
Kind regards, Tigran
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Greg KH -
Tigran Aivazian