Re: [PATCH version 2] [SQUASHME] "FC Pass Thru support" fixed forblock/for-2.6.31 tree

[Jens Axboe]

On Wed, May 20 2009, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 11:16 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 May 2009 15:54:59 +0300 Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > This patch should be squashed into
> > >     [SCSI] FC Pass Thru support
> > > 
> > > If it needs to compile after Tejun's block-layer revamps
> > > (all of them)
> > 
> > Is there some reason that the FC passthrough support (and any followup
> > patches) can't be pushed through the block tree.  It clearly currently
> > doesn't depend on anything new in the scsi tree ...
> 
> That would preserve the logical sequence of patches, yes.  However, Jens
> is a bit pressed for time, so I agreed to do this in SCSI.
> 
> Unfortuantely, I still need the block tree for-next to be rebased up to
> the current linus head because of a couple of conflicts:
> 
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in drivers/block/hd.c
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in drivers/block/mg_disk.c
> 
> The are both just rebase/rebase conflicts:  it looks like there are two
> commit ids for 

James, I'll get this fixed (either pull linus tree in or rebase) and
send you a note! It wont be before tomorrow, I think.

-- 
Jens Axboe

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