On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 04:14:56PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> Maybe I'm too pessimistic in my assumption that external open module
> writers don't actually follow mainline closely; and maybe part of me
> would love for them to follow it closer, so close that they would even
> consider s
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 05:18:38AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:39:20 +0100
>
> > On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 10:25:28PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > sys_{open,read} can finally be unexported.
> >
> > Andrew, can you please put
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 10:54:10AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> I once made the mistake of putting a "please tell [EMAIL PROTECTED]" printk
> in 3c59x.c. My inbox nearly died. Then there's that damned "PCI bus hidden
> behind transparent bus" printk which I've actually removed from -mm becaus
On 09/11/2007 12:41 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:15:56AM +0200, Rene Herman wrote:
On 09/11/2007 12:18 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 01:17:59PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
There is no benefit in making some rigid set of rules.
Is is considered beneficial
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:15:56AM +0200, Rene Herman wrote:
> On 09/11/2007 12:18 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 01:17:59PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
>>> There is no benefit in making some rigid set of rules.
>> Is is considered beneficial to provide API stability for exte
On 09/11/2007 12:18 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 01:17:59PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
There is no benefit in making some rigid set of rules.
Is is considered beneficial to provide API stability for external
modules or not?
If I may...
Yes, it is. Just not at any sign
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 01:17:59PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:58:21 +0200 Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 10:25:56AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > >...
> > > Also, Adrian goes on and on with weird theories about how I'm picking on
>
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:58:21 +0200 Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 10:25:56AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >...
> > Also, Adrian goes on and on with weird theories about how I'm picking on
> > him. But other patches (such as 7d12e780e003f93433d49ce78c) DO OTHER
>
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 10:25:56AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>...
> Also, Adrian goes on and on with weird theories about how I'm picking on
> him. But other patches (such as 7d12e780e003f93433d49ce78c) DO OTHER
> STUFF. Like simplify the code, and make it smaller, faster or more
> maintainable
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 18:44:54 +0100 Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A single kernel release seems sufficient. It gives the maintainers of such
> > code time to hear about the breakage and time to fix it.
>
> Users don't report warnings generally. They won't even see modprobe
> warnings or
> A single kernel release seems sufficient. It gives the maintainers of such
> code time to hear about the breakage and time to fix it.
Users don't report warnings generally. They won't even see modprobe
warnings or anything in dmesg. Short of using their sound card to scream
"Next release you ar
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:43:58 +0100 Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 02:23:24AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > And I think almost everyone disagrees with you. We just carry too much
> > > crap around because of your subborness in this issue, and it gets really
> > >
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 02:23:24 -0700
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to see "everyone" explain what we lose by giving
> developers a bit of warning before we break their stuff.
here's the skinny: 99% of the external module developers won't notice
until they're gone, even wit
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 02:23:24AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > And I think almost everyone disagrees with you. We just carry too much
> > crap around because of your subborness in this issue, and it gets really
> > annoying to have some high up on the food chain fighting his longly flight
> >
> I would like to see "everyone" explain what we lose by giving developers a
> bit of warning before we break their stuff.
We lose the ability to get anything done on a timescale that makes it
happen. Instead we have this continual cycle of remove, akpm says no,
submitter forgets, 3 month pause, r
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 05:18:38AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> I'm happy to see this go too, but please add the necessary
> export to arch/sparc64/kernel/sparc64_ksyms.S so that the
> solaris system call table reference in
> arch/sparc64/solaris/systbls.S can be satisfied.
>
> This keeps coming u
From: Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:39:20 +0100
> On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 10:25:28PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > sys_{open,read} can finally be unexported.
>
> Andrew, can you please put this in? Having these exports for syscalls around
> hsa been a long-time a
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 02:23:24AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 10:08:08 +0100 Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>...
> > > Adrian knows this, yet he habitually sends zero-warning export-removal
> > > patches and I habitually ignore them. I guess we must both enj
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 10:08:08 +0100 Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 02:59:40PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Sure. But I think it is better to give people some warning when we're
> > planning on breaking out-of-tree things. I do occasionally receive report
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 02:59:40PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Sure. But I think it is better to give people some warning when we're
> planning on breaking out-of-tree things. I do occasionally receive reports
> of "hey, the X driver which I get from Y doesn't work any more". Often
> it's open
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 11:41:18PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 00:22:03 +0200
> Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 02:59:40PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:39:20 +0100 Christoph Hellwig
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 00:22:03 +0200
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 02:59:40PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:39:20 +0100 Christoph Hellwig
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Adrian knows this, yet he habitually sends zero-warning
> > export-
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 02:59:40PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:39:20 +0100 Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 10:25:28PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > sys_{open,read} can finally be unexported.
> >
> > Andrew, can you please put th
On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 21:39:20 +0100 Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 10:25:28PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > sys_{open,read} can finally be unexported.
>
> Andrew, can you please put this in? Having these exports for syscalls around
> hsa been a long-time ann
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 10:25:28PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> sys_{open,read} can finally be unexported.
Andrew, can you please put this in? Having these exports for syscalls around
hsa been a long-time annoyance that can finally be fixed now.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "uns
sys_{open,read} can finally be unexported.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
This patch has been sent on:
- 27 Aug 2007
fs/open.c |1 -
fs/read_write.c |1 -
2 files changed, 2 deletions(-)
6f6884f9ee675f2e804c6c58ca46337f9765dd0d
diff --git a/fs/open.c b/fs/op
On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 03:53:02PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 23:27:23 +0200
> Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 02:06:48AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > >...
> > > Changes since 2.6.23-rc2-mm2:
> > >...
> > > git-alsa.patch
> > >...
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 23:27:23 +0200
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 02:06:48AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >...
> > Changes since 2.6.23-rc2-mm2:
> >...
> > git-alsa.patch
> >...
> > git trees
> >...
>
> sys_{open,read} can finally be unexported.
>
isn't sys_
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 02:06:48AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>...
> Changes since 2.6.23-rc2-mm2:
>...
> git-alsa.patch
>...
> git trees
>...
sys_{open,read} can finally be unexported.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/open.c |1 -
fs/read_write.c |1 -
2
29 matches
Mail list logo
