On Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 07:24:32AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 03:34:36PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote: > > The zero_user() API is almost unused these days. Finish the job of > > removing it. > > Both the block layer users really should use bvec based helpers. > I was planning to get to that this merge window. Can we queue up > just the other two removals for and remove zero_user after -rc1 > to reduce conflicts? If I'd known you were doing that, I wouldn't've bothered. However, Andrew's taken the patches now, so I'm inclined to leave them in. No matter which tree it gets merged through, this is a relatively easy conflict to resolve (ie just take your version). I have some more patches which build on the removal of zero_user() so it'd be nice to not hold them up.
