> Such results was never posted and unless we see those, I think
> I'd rather NACK this patch instead. I like the cleanup, but only
> if it's guaranteed to _not_ brake things, specially when dealing
> with a kernel parameter.
Do you have some test case or test standard for me perform.
> --
>
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 06:53:29AM +, Caizhiyong wrote:
> >> For further information, see "https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/6/550;
> >
> > Thanks for doing this. Could we please get some acked-by's or,
> > preferably, tested-by's from the MTD people?
>
> Acked-by: Ezequiel Garcia
I don't
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 06:53:29AM +, Caizhiyong wrote:
For further information, see https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/6/550;
Thanks for doing this. Could we please get some acked-by's or,
preferably, tested-by's from the MTD people?
Acked-by: Ezequiel Garcia
Such results was never posted and unless we see those, I think
I'd rather NACK this patch instead. I like the cleanup, but only
if it's guaranteed to _not_ brake things, specially when dealing
with a kernel parameter.
Do you have some test case or test standard for me perform.
--
Ezequiel
> Nobody has had time to test this on MTD, it seems, and as such, I
> strongly recommend you do not force it through -mm. We are perfectly
> capable of merging it through the MTD tree if it ever gets proper
> vetting by people in MTD (not just on block devices), and I am well
> aware of this patch
>> For further information, see "https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/6/550;
>
> Thanks for doing this. Could we please get some acked-by's or,
> preferably, tested-by's from the MTD people?
Acked-by: Ezequiel Garcia
Acked-by: Andrew Morton
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
For further information, see https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/6/550;
Thanks for doing this. Could we please get some acked-by's or,
preferably, tested-by's from the MTD people?
Acked-by: Ezequiel Garcia ezequiel.gar...@free-electrons.com
Acked-by: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
--
To
Nobody has had time to test this on MTD, it seems, and as such, I
strongly recommend you do not force it through -mm. We are perfectly
capable of merging it through the MTD tree if it ever gets proper
vetting by people in MTD (not just on block devices), and I am well
aware of this patch
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 13:14:17 + Caizhiyong
> wrote:
>
>> In the previous version, adjust the cmdline parser code to library-style
>> code, and move it to a separate file "block/cmdline-parser.c", we can use
>> it in some client code.
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 13:14:17 + Caizhiyong wrote:
> In the previous version, adjust the cmdline parser code to library-style
> code, and move it to a separate file "block/cmdline-parser.c", we can use
> it in some client code. there is no any functionality change in the adjusting.
>
> this
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 13:14:17 + Caizhiyong caizhiy...@hisilicon.com wrote:
In the previous version, adjust the cmdline parser code to library-style
code, and move it to a separate file block/cmdline-parser.c, we can use
it in some client code. there is no any functionality change in the
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 13:14:17 + Caizhiyong caizhiy...@hisilicon.com
wrote:
In the previous version, adjust the cmdline parser code to library-style
code, and move it to a separate file block/cmdline-parser.c,
12 matches
Mail list logo
