On Fri, 13 Jun 2025 20:51:06 +0100 Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. Sure, Christoph, please just proceed with the block changes and we can see what the conflicts look like when Stephen hits them. If Matthew's series needs modification then so be it.
