On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:25:55AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 10/15, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 14-10-15, 11:51, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > On 10/09, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > > +struct dentry *debugfs_create_xlong(const char *name, umode_t mode,
> > > > + struct dentry *parent, unsigned
> > > > long *value)
> > > > +{
> > > > + return debugfs_create_file(name, mode, parent, value,
> > > > &fops_xlong);
> > >
> > > Were you going to refresh this on my debugfs_create_mode()
> > > patches? Otherwise the patch looks fine to me.
> >
> > I thought you need to refresh your set as I posted this before you
> > have :)
> >
>
> :)
>
> Well this patch is creating xlong without any
> read-only/write-only ops, so it has the same potential problems
> as what the debugfs_create_mode() series was fixing. I'm fine
> either way though.
Viresh, please rebase your patch on top of Stephen's series, it should
make your patch much smaller. I've applied his series to my tree now.
thanks,
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
