| Message ID | 20190723114813.GA14870@localhost (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Documentation: filesystem: fix "Removed Sysctls" table | expand |
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 12:48:13 +0100 Sheriff Esseson <sheriffesseson@gmail.com> wrote: > the "Removed Sysctls" section is a table - bring it alive with ReST. > > Signed-off-by: Sheriff Esseson <sheriffesseson@gmail.com> So this appears to be identical to the patch you sent three days ago; is there a reason why you are sending it again now? Thanks, jon
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 07:42:18AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 12:48:13 +0100 > Sheriff Esseson <sheriffesseson@gmail.com> wrote: > > > the "Removed Sysctls" section is a table - bring it alive with ReST. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sheriff Esseson <sheriffesseson@gmail.com> > > So this appears to be identical to the patch you sent three days ago; is > there a reason why you are sending it again now? > > Thanks, > > jon Sorry, I was think the patch went unnoticed during the merge window - I could not find a response.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 03:52:01PM +0100, Sheriff Esseson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 07:42:18AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 12:48:13 +0100 > > Sheriff Esseson <sheriffesseson@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > the "Removed Sysctls" section is a table - bring it alive with ReST. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sheriff Esseson <sheriffesseson@gmail.com> > > > > So this appears to be identical to the patch you sent three days ago; is > > there a reason why you are sending it again now? > > > > Thanks, > > > > jon > > Sorry, I was think the patch went unnoticed during the merge window - I could > not find a response. The correct thing to do in that case is to reply to the original patch and ask if it has been looked at. The usual way of doing this is quoting the commit message and replying with a "Ping?" comment to bump it back to the top of everyone's mail stacks. But, again, 3 days is not a long time, people tend to be extremely busy and might take a few days to get to reviewing non-critical changes, and people may not even review patches during the merge window. I'd suggest waiting a week before pinging a patch you've sent if there's been no response.... Cheers, Dave.
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 12:48:13 +0100 Sheriff Esseson <sheriffesseson@gmail.com> wrote: > the "Removed Sysctls" section is a table - bring it alive with ReST. > > Signed-off-by: Sheriff Esseson <sheriffesseson@gmail.com> > --- > Documentation/admin-guide/xfs.rst | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/xfs.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/xfs.rst > index e76665a8f2f2..fb5b39f73059 100644 > --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/xfs.rst > +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/xfs.rst > @@ -337,11 +337,12 @@ None at present. > Removed Sysctls > =============== > > +============================= ======= > Name Removed > - ---- ------- > +============================= ======= > fs.xfs.xfsbufd_centisec v4.0 > fs.xfs.age_buffer_centisecs v4.0 > - > +============================= ======= I've applied this, thanks. jon
diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/xfs.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/xfs.rst index e76665a8f2f2..fb5b39f73059 100644 --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/xfs.rst +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/xfs.rst @@ -337,11 +337,12 @@ None at present. Removed Sysctls =============== +============================= ======= Name Removed - ---- ------- +============================= ======= fs.xfs.xfsbufd_centisec v4.0 fs.xfs.age_buffer_centisecs v4.0 - +============================= ======= Error handling ==============
the "Removed Sysctls" section is a table - bring it alive with ReST. Signed-off-by: Sheriff Esseson <sheriffesseson@gmail.com> --- Documentation/admin-guide/xfs.rst | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)