[GIT,PULL] Ceph updates for 5.5-rc1
mbox series

Message ID 20191204200307.21047-1-idryomov@gmail.com
State New
Headers show
Series
  • [GIT,PULL] Ceph updates for 5.5-rc1
Related show

Pull-request

https://github.com/ceph/ceph-client.git tags/ceph-for-5.5-rc1

Message

Ilya Dryomov Dec. 4, 2019, 8:03 p.m. UTC
Hi Linus,

The following changes since commit 219d54332a09e8d8741c1e1982f5eae56099de85:

  Linux 5.4 (2019-11-24 16:32:01 -0800)

are available in the Git repository at:

  https://github.com/ceph/ceph-client.git tags/ceph-for-5.5-rc1

for you to fetch changes up to 82995cc6c5ae4bf4d72edef381a085e52d5b5905:

  libceph, rbd, ceph: convert to use the new mount API (2019-11-27 22:28:37 +0100)

----------------------------------------------------------------
The two highlights are a set of improvements to how rbd read-only
mappings are handled and a conversion to the new mount API (slightly
complicated by the fact that we had a common option parsing framework
that called out into rbd and the filesystem instead of them calling
into it).  Also included a few scattered fixes and a MAINTAINERS update
for rbd, adding Dongsheng as a reviewer.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Colin Ian King (1):
      rbd: fix spelling mistake "requeueing" -> "requeuing"

David Howells (1):
      libceph, rbd, ceph: convert to use the new mount API

Ilya Dryomov (11):
      libceph: drop unnecessary check from dispatch() in mon_client.c
      rbd: update MAINTAINERS info
      rbd: introduce rbd_is_snap()
      rbd: introduce RBD_DEV_FLAG_READONLY
      rbd: treat images mapped read-only seriously
      rbd: disallow read-write partitions on images mapped read-only
      rbd: don't acquire exclusive lock for read-only mappings
      rbd: don't establish watch for read-only mappings
      rbd: remove snapshot existence validation code
      rbd: don't query snapshot features
      rbd: ask for a weaker incompat mask for read-only mappings

Jeff Layton (3):
      ceph: make several helper accessors take const pointers
      ceph: tone down loglevel on ceph_mdsc_build_path warning
      ceph: don't leave ino field in ceph_mds_request_head uninitialized

Xiubo Li (1):
      ceph: fix geting random mds from mdsmap

 MAINTAINERS                  |   2 +-
 drivers/block/rbd.c          | 467 ++++++++++++++++---------------
 fs/ceph/cache.c              |   9 +-
 fs/ceph/cache.h              |   5 +-
 fs/ceph/mds_client.c         |  19 +-
 fs/ceph/mdsmap.c             |  11 +-
 fs/ceph/super.c              | 646 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
 fs/ceph/super.h              |  13 +-
 include/linux/ceph/libceph.h |  10 +-
 net/ceph/ceph_common.c       | 419 +++++++++++++---------------
 net/ceph/messenger.c         |   2 -
 net/ceph/mon_client.c        |   3 -
 12 files changed, 803 insertions(+), 803 deletions(-)

Comments

Linus Torvalds Dec. 5, 2019, 9:19 p.m. UTC | #1
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 12:02 PM Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Colin Ian King (1):
>       rbd: fix spelling mistake "requeueing" -> "requeuing"

Hmm. Why? That's not a spelling mistake, it's the same word.

Arguably "requeue" isn't much of a real word to begin with, and is
more of a made-up tech language. And then on wiktionary apparently the
only "ing" form you find is the one without the final "e", but
honestly, that's reaching. The word doesn't exist in _real_
dictionaries at all.

I suspect "re-queueing" with the explicit hyphen would be the more
legible spelling (with or without the "e" - both forms are as
correct), but whatever.

I've pulled it, but I really don't think it was misspelled to begin
with, and somebody who actually cares about language probably wouldn't
like either form.

              Linus
pr-tracker-bot@kernel.org Dec. 5, 2019, 9:30 p.m. UTC | #2
The pull request you sent on Wed,  4 Dec 2019 21:03:07 +0100:

> https://github.com/ceph/ceph-client.git tags/ceph-for-5.5-rc1

has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/a231582359ec27e121bf4bb0ab3df8355f919d1d

Thank you!
Ilya Dryomov Dec. 6, 2019, 11:05 a.m. UTC | #3
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 10:19 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 12:02 PM Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Colin Ian King (1):
> >       rbd: fix spelling mistake "requeueing" -> "requeuing"
>
> Hmm. Why? That's not a spelling mistake, it's the same word.
>
> Arguably "requeue" isn't much of a real word to begin with, and is
> more of a made-up tech language. And then on wiktionary apparently the
> only "ing" form you find is the one without the final "e", but
> honestly, that's reaching. The word doesn't exist in _real_
> dictionaries at all.
>
> I suspect "re-queueing" with the explicit hyphen would be the more
> legible spelling (with or without the "e" - both forms are as
> correct), but whatever.
>
> I've pulled it, but I really don't think it was misspelled to begin
> with, and somebody who actually cares about language probably wouldn't
> like either form.

FWIW that was my spelling.  I suspected the same thing, saw it being
used in various spellings, but since Colin is a native speaker I took
the patch.

Thanks,

                Ilya