Message ID | 1645112566-115804-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | scsi: libsas and users: Factor out LLDD TMF code | expand |
Damien, > This series and my pm8001 series have a conflict. When applying the > pm8001 patches on top of these libsas changes, patch 28 has a fairly > easy to resolve conflict. Let me know if you want me to send a v6 > rebased on top of this. "fairly easy to resolve", huh? Sure, if you manually rework the entire patch. Please send me an updated version of #28. The rest of the series is fine... Thanks!
On 2/20/22 06:53, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > Damien, > >> This series and my pm8001 series have a conflict. When applying the >> pm8001 patches on top of these libsas changes, patch 28 has a fairly >> easy to resolve conflict. Let me know if you want me to send a v6 >> rebased on top of this. > > "fairly easy to resolve", huh? Sure, if you manually rework the entire > patch. Sorry about that. It is easy to resolve once you have been staring at the code for days :) Sending v6 for patch 28. > > Please send me an updated version of #28. The rest of the series is > fine... > > Thanks! >
On 2/20/22 06:55, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > John, > >> The LLDD TMF code is almost identical between hisi_sas, pm8001, and >> mvsas drivers. >> >> This series factors out that code into libsas, thus reducing much >> duplication and giving a net reduction of ~350 LoC. > > Applied to 5.18/scsi-staging, thanks! Did you push this ? I do not see John series in the branch...
Damien, >> Applied to 5.18/scsi-staging, thanks! > > Did you push this ? I do not see John series in the branch... It's there now.
On 2/20/22 10:31, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > Damien, > >>> Applied to 5.18/scsi-staging, thanks! >> >> Did you push this ? I do not see John series in the branch... > > It's there now. > Got it. Thanks !
On 19/02/2022 21:53, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > Damien, > >> This series and my pm8001 series have a conflict. When applying the >> pm8001 patches on top of these libsas changes, patch 28 has a fairly >> easy to resolve conflict. Let me know if you want me to send a v6 >> rebased on top of this. > "fairly easy to resolve", huh? Sure, if you manually rework the entire > patch. > > Please send me an updated version of #28. The rest of the series is > fine... Thanks Martin and Damien. I'll mention potential conflicts in my cover letters in future to help co-ordinate things better. John