Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 04:48:20PM +0100, James Simmons wrote: > So this is coming from trying to understand the "merge them together" > part. Some people reading this it implies all the headers would be > eventually merged into one big header and placed into include/uapi/linux. Sounds like a

Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 08:20:15PM +, Dilger, Andreas wrote: > > On Jan 21, 2017, at 02:24, Greg Kroah-Hartman > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:33:11PM +, James Simmons wrote: > > >> > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:06:47PM -0500,

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 08:20:15PM +, Dilger, Andreas wrote: > On Jan 21, 2017, at 02:24, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:33:11PM +, James Simmons wrote: > >> > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:06:47PM -0500, James Simmons

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

Greg said to go ahead... I think you misread something. We've all agreed to move the uapi directories into a separate dir and later we can discuss if it should be one enormous file or 12 huge files. regards, dan carpenter ___ devel mailing list

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

On Jan 21, 2017, at 02:24, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:33:11PM +, James Simmons wrote: >> > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:06:47PM -0500, James Simmons wrote: >> Not for landing. This is the purposed UAPI headers >> with the

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

> > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:06:47PM -0500, James Simmons wrote: > > > > > > Not for landing. This is the purposed UAPI headers > > > > > > with the removal of unlikely and debugging macros. > > > > > > This is just for feedback to see if this is acceptable > > > > > > for the upstream

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:33:11PM +, James Simmons wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:06:47PM -0500, James Simmons wrote: > > > > > Not for landing. This is the purposed UAPI headers > > > > > with the removal of unlikely and debugging macros. > > > > > This is just for feedback to

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

> > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:06:47PM -0500, James Simmons wrote: > > > > Not for landing. This is the purposed UAPI headers > > > > with the removal of unlikely and debugging macros. > > > > This is just for feedback to see if this is acceptable > > > > for the upstream client. > > > > > > >

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 09:28:30PM +, James Simmons wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:06:47PM -0500, James Simmons wrote: > > > Not for landing. This is the purposed UAPI headers > > > with the removal of unlikely and debugging macros. > > > This is just for feedback to see if this is

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:06:47PM -0500, James Simmons wrote: > > Not for landing. This is the purposed UAPI headers > > with the removal of unlikely and debugging macros. > > This is just for feedback to see if this is acceptable > > for the upstream client. > > > > Signed-off-by: James

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:06:47PM -0500, James Simmons wrote: > Not for landing. This is the purposed UAPI headers > with the removal of unlikely and debugging macros. > This is just for feedback to see if this is acceptable > for the upstream client. > > Signed-off-by: James Simmons