On Tue, 2025-06-17 at 23:15 +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 10:12:08PM +0000, Viacheslav Dubeyko wrote: > > On Tue, 2025-06-17 at 23:01 +0100, Al Viro wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 06:21:38PM +0000, Viacheslav Dubeyko wrote: > > > > > > > Tested-by: Viacheslav Dubeyko <Slava.Dubeyko@xxxxxxx> > > > > Reviewed-by: Viacheslav Dubeyko <Slava.Dubeyko@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > OK, tested-by/reviewed-by applied to commits in that branch, branch > > > force-pushed to the same place > > > (git.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/viro/vfs.git work.ceph-d_name-fixes) > > > > > > Would you prefer to merge it via the ceph tree? Or I could throw it > > > into my #for-next and push it to Linus come the next window - up to you... > > > > Frankly speaking, your tree could be the faster way to upstream. However, I can > > push this patch set into the ceph tree for more deeper testing in the internal > > testing infrastructure. But I don't expect any serious issues in the patches > > that could introduce some bugs. > > > > Ilya, > > > > What is your opinion on this? Would you prefer to go through the ceph tree? > > I can send a pull request to you now just as easily as I could send it to Linus > a month and a half down the road... ;-) Up to you, guys. So, if we don't have any other opinion, then let's send the patch set through your tree. Thanks, Slava.
