futher decouple DAX from block devices

[Dan Williams]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 8:55 AM Darrick J. Wong <djwong at kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 08:42:29AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 4:52 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr at canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Dan,
> > >
> > > On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 13:46:31 -0700 Dan Williams <dan.j.williams at intel.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > My merge resolution is here [1]. Christoph, please have a look. The
> > > > rebase and the merge result are both passing my test and I'm now going
> > > > to review the individual patches. However, while I do that and collect
> > > > acks from DM and EROFS folks, I want to give Stephen a heads up that
> > > > this is coming. Primarily I want to see if someone sees a better
> > > > strategy to merge this, please let me know, but if not I plan to walk
> > > > Stephen and Linus through the resolution.
> > >
> > > It doesn't look to bad to me (however it is a bit late in the cycle :-(
> > > ).  Once you are happy, just put it in your tree (some of the conflicts
> > > are against the current -rc3 based version of your tree anyway) and I
> > > will cope with it on Monday.
> >
> > Christoph, Darrick, Shiyang,
> >
> > I'm losing my nerve to try to jam this into v5.16 this late in the
> > cycle.
>
> Always a solid choice to hold off for a little more testing and a little
> less anxiety. :)
>
> I don't usually accept new code patches for iomap after rc4 anyway.
>
> > I do want to get dax+reflink squared away as soon as possible,
> > but that looks like something that needs to build on top of a
> > v5.16-rc1 at this point. If Linus does a -rc8 then maybe it would have
> > enough soak time, but otherwise I want to take the time to collect the
> > acks and queue up some more follow-on cleanups to prepare for
> > block-less-dax.
>
> I think that hwpoison-calls-xfs-rmap patchset is a prerequisite for
> dax+reflink anyway, right?  /me had concluded both were 5.17 things.

Ok, cool, sounds like a plan.