Re: [PATCH v3] 0/4 fs/ioctl.c coding style, function renaming/factoring

[Erez Zadok <ezk@cs.sunysb.edu>]

In message <20071030160442.e51e2b45.akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Andrew Morton writes:
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:39:55 -0400
> Erez Zadok <ezk@cs.sunysb.edu> wrote:
> 
> > This series of 4 proposed patches (take 3) changes fs/ioctl.c and Unionfs as
> > follows.
> 
> The problem is of course that you need these in your tree for ongoing
> development, but 2.6.25 is months away.  They look OK to me so I suggest
> that you go ahead and commit them to your git tree and I'll drop them
> again.  Please resend them for merging in the 2.6.25-rc1 merge window.

The first three patches in my set can go to -mm/mainline now, if it's ok w/
you.  I think this fs/ioctl.c cleanup is useful indepenent of unionfs.  The
3rd patch, making unionfs use vfs_ioctl, is a very small patch, and I can
wait on it until the first 3 patches are in Linus's tree (for now, I'll just
call the lower ->ioctl/unlocked_ioctl).

> unionfs has been hanging around for a long time now and we should work
> towards getting it into 2.6.25 or dropped from -mm (sorry).  Right now
> would be a great time to get this process underway.  
[...]

Sure.  I'd like to start with a re-review of the current code, since much
have changed.  I did promise Al a few weeks ago that I'll post the whole
thing against mainline.  But I'll also go dig up whatever old mail is there
for when we first posted the code.

Cheers,
Erez.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/