On Thu, Aug 28 2008, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > 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 Completely agreed. Al, I remember talking to you about this at the storage summit back in february. What are your current plans wrt moving this forward? -- Jens Axboe -- 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
