On Fri, 2005-01-28 at 06:14 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 07:59:42PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-01-26 at 08:07 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > > > Another question: is the SDD module even available for mainline kernels,
> > > > or is it only
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 06:14:46AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> In my experience, the only way to get exports into a major distribution
> is to get them into mainline kernel.org. If you can get Red Hat to
> change its stance on this, works for me!
That's not the point. You're trying to let
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 07:59:42PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-01-26 at 08:07 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > > Another question: is the SDD module even available for mainline kernels,
> > > or is it only available for distribution kernels ?
> >
> > Distributions only.
>
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 07:59:42PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Wed, 2005-01-26 at 08:07 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
Another question: is the SDD module even available for mainline kernels,
or is it only available for distribution kernels ?
Distributions only.
don't you
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 06:14:46AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
In my experience, the only way to get exports into a major distribution
is to get them into mainline kernel.org. If you can get Red Hat to
change its stance on this, works for me!
That's not the point. You're trying to let us
On Fri, 2005-01-28 at 06:14 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 07:59:42PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Wed, 2005-01-26 at 08:07 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
Another question: is the SDD module even available for mainline kernels,
or is it only available for
On Wed, 2005-01-26 at 08:07 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Another question: is the SDD module even available for mainline kernels,
> > or is it only available for distribution kernels ?
>
> Distributions only.
don't you think it's a bit weird/offensive to ask for exports in the
mainline
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 10:01:00AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 10:58 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 08:36:22PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 14:16 -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > > > (you may think "it's only
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:55:04AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:51:31AM +, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:43:08AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > o vfs_follow_link(): used to interpret symbolic links, which
> > > > might
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:51:31AM +, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:43:08AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > o vfs_follow_link(): used to interpret symbolic links, which
> > > might point outside of SAN Filesystem.
> >
> > This one is going away very soon, including the
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:43:08AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > o vfs_follow_link(): used to interpret symbolic links, which
> > might point outside of SAN Filesystem.
>
> This one is going away very soon, including the whole old-style
> ->follow_link support - for technical reasons.
> o vfs_follow_link(): used to interpret symbolic links, which
> might point outside of SAN Filesystem.
This one is going away very soon, including the whole old-style
->follow_link support - for technical reasons.
Please convert your driver to put the contents of the symlink into
...
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 10:58 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 08:36:22PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 14:16 -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > > (you may think "it's only 100 bytes", well, there are 700+ other such
> > > > functions, total that
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 10:58 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 08:36:22PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 14:16 -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
(you may think it's only 100 bytes, well, there are 700+ other such
functions, total that makes over at
o vfs_follow_link(): used to interpret symbolic links, which
might point outside of SAN Filesystem.
This one is going away very soon, including the whole old-style
-follow_link support - for technical reasons.
Please convert your driver to put the contents of the symlink into
... and
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:43:08AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
o vfs_follow_link(): used to interpret symbolic links, which
might point outside of SAN Filesystem.
This one is going away very soon, including the whole old-style
-follow_link support - for technical reasons.
Not
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:51:31AM +, Al Viro wrote:
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:43:08AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
o vfs_follow_link(): used to interpret symbolic links, which
might point outside of SAN Filesystem.
This one is going away very soon, including the whole
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:55:04AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:51:31AM +, Al Viro wrote:
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:43:08AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
o vfs_follow_link(): used to interpret symbolic links, which
might point outside
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 10:01:00AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 10:58 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 08:36:22PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 14:16 -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
(you may think it's only 100 bytes,
On Wed, 2005-01-26 at 08:07 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
Another question: is the SDD module even available for mainline kernels,
or is it only available for distribution kernels ?
Distributions only.
don't you think it's a bit weird/offensive to ask for exports in the
mainline
"Paul E. McKenney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So, could the exports for the following symbols from the list please be
> retained through December 31, 2005?
>
> blk_get_queue
> sock_setsockopt
> vfs_follow_link
> __read_lock_failed
> __write_lock_failed
I don't
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 08:36:22PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 14:16 -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > (you may think "it's only 100 bytes", well, there are 700+ other such
> > > functions, total that makes over at least 70Kb of unswappable, wasted
> > > memory if not
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 08:36:22PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 14:16 -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
(you may think it's only 100 bytes, well, there are 700+ other such
functions, total that makes over at least 70Kb of unswappable, wasted
memory if not more.)
Paul E. McKenney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, could the exports for the following symbols from the list please be
retained through December 31, 2005?
blk_get_queue
sock_setsockopt
vfs_follow_link
__read_lock_failed
__write_lock_failed
I don't think
lau den 15.01.2005 Klokka 22:35 (+0100) skreiv Adrian Bunk:
> My figures in [1] show, any kind of deprecation would mean _much_ extra
> work within the current 2.6 development model.
Whereas removal of necessary APIs would not? Thanks...
Cleanups are important, but so is actual development
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 02:16:44PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> ty den 11.01.2005 Klokka 09:31 (+0100) skreiv Arjan van de Ven:
>...
> > If it is going to take a LOT longer though I still feel it's wrong to
> > bloat *everyones* kernel with this stuff.
> >
> > (you may think "it's only 100
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 02:16:44PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
ty den 11.01.2005 Klokka 09:31 (+0100) skreiv Arjan van de Ven:
...
If it is going to take a LOT longer though I still feel it's wrong to
bloat *everyones* kernel with this stuff.
(you may think it's only 100 bytes, well,
lau den 15.01.2005 Klokka 22:35 (+0100) skreiv Adrian Bunk:
My figures in [1] show, any kind of deprecation would mean _much_ extra
work within the current 2.6 development model.
Whereas removal of necessary APIs would not? Thanks...
Cleanups are important, but so is actual development
28 matches
Mail list logo
