Re: [PATCH -mm] fs: define file_fsync() even for CONFIG_BLOCK=n

On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 10:30:20AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:06:10AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > There's nothing that is problematic for file_fsync() with CONFIG_BLOCK=n,
> > and it's built in unconditionally anyways, so move the prototype out to
> > reflect that. Without this, the unionfs build bails out.
> 
> Unionfs should stop using it instead.
 
We did stop.

Josef 'Jeff' Sipek.

-- 
NT is to UNIX what a doughnut is to a particle accelerator.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH -mm] fs: define file_fsync() even for CONFIG_BLOCK=n
    • From: Paul Mundt <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH -mm] fs: define file_fsync() even for CONFIG_BLOCK=n
    • From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: O_NOLINK for open()
• Next by Date: Re: [linux-usb-devel] spontaneous disconnect with "usb-storage: implement autosuspend"
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH -mm] fs: define file_fsync() even for CONFIG_BLOCK=n
• Next by thread: [PATCH -mm] ssb: Make pcmciahost depend on PCMCIA=y
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]