Doh! I should have looked at the patches more closely.
I agree that if the patches are for the upstream client then sending them to Gerritt
won't work. I'll review the patches and then they should be sent to Greg (staging
I'm trying to get a Gerritt instance that tracks the upstream kernel set up, so that
we can accept patches there and have them tested. But for now Tao has been managing the
upstream submission of patches via Github.
On 2013-11-17, at 22:32, "Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin(a)intel.com> wrote:
The problem here is that the patches are for the client code in mainline kernel.
So I've been wondering myself how to get the two working together: our own tree and
(somewhat different) mainline.
I don't think we would be able to route all patches traffic through our tree in any
On Nov 18, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Dilger, Andreas wrote:
> Hello Alexander,
> Thanks for sending in your patches. These are very timely fixes that we need for the
upstream kernel code.
> Typically we review patches for Lustre using Gerritt, which allows us to track all of
the review comments in one place, and also hooks into our automated testing system.
> Please see:
> Cheers, Andreas
> On 2013-11-16, at 15:56, "Alexander Beregalov"
>> Hi Andreas, Oleg,
>> Could you review this bunch of patches. However it is not yet compilable,
>> more efforts are required.