Re: FUSE workflow=? (Re: [RESEND1, PATCH 1/2] fuse: convert printk -> pr_*)

[Miklos Szeredi]

On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 10:38 AM Kirill Smelkov <kirr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> +torvalds
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 04:57:58PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 10:15 AM Kirill Smelkov <kirr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Functions, like pr_err, are a more modern variant of printing compared to
> > > printk. They could be used to denoise sources by using needed level in
> > > the print function name, and by automatically inserting per-driver /
> > > function / ... print prefix as defined by pr_fmt macro. pr_* are also
> > > said to be used in Documentation/process/coding-style.rst and more
> > > recent code - for example overlayfs - uses them instead of printk.
> > >
> > > Convert CUSE and FUSE to use the new pr_* functions.
> > >
> > > CUSE output stays completely unchanged, while FUSE output is amended a
> > > bit for "trying to steal weird page" warning - the second line now comes
> > > also with "fuse:" prefix. I hope it is ok.
> >
> > Yep.  Applied, thanks.
>
> Miklos, thanks for feedback. Could you please clarify where the patch is
> applied? Here is what linux/MAINTAINERS says
>
>         FUSE: FILESYSTEM IN USERSPACE
>         M:      Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx>
>         L:      linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>         W:      http://fuse.sourceforge.net/
>         T:      git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mszeredi/fuse.git
>         S:      Maintained
>         F:      fs/fuse/
>         F:      include/uapi/linux/fuse.h
>         F:      Documentation/filesystems/fuse.txt
>
> but git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mszeredi/fuse.git was
> not updated for ~ 2 months. I see other "Applied, thanks" replies from
> you on linux-fsdevel in recent days and it suggests that patches are
> indeed applied, but where they are integrated is the question.

My private patch queue.

> Linux-next also has no post-5.1 fuse patches at all, so I'm really
> puzzled about what is going on.
>
> Is there any reason not to keep for-next fuse branch publicly available?
> Or am I missing something?

I usually push to fuse.git#for-next within a day or two of adding it
to my queue.

> Could you please also have a look at other posted patches? I'm
> struggling for months sending them to you and not getting feedback. It
> is kind of frustrating to work in this mode.

I see.  I'll try to give more frequent feedback on patches.  The
reason for not replying is not that I intentionally ignore incoming
patches, but because I'm working on something else and context
switching between completely different projects is not easy for me.

Thanks,
Miklos