On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 01:40:10PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Peter Osterlund wrote: > > > > Why not just revert the offending change and try again during the next > > merge window, assuming someone has figured out an acceptable way to > > handle this mess by then? > > Well,, for 2.6.27 that's what we'll have to do. But there's actually a > real problem here - the unlocked ioctl's (which we _should_ prefer) have a > strictly weaker and worse interface. I also wonder if any other > block_ioctl users were converted.. Actually both interfaces are a fscking disaster. The right things to pass is neither and inode nor a file but a struct block_device. Al had all this work done a while and it just needs rebasing to a current tree: http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/viro/bdev.git;a=summary -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
