On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 12:13:27PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Wed, Sep 03 2008, Al Viro wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 09:26:43AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > > 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? > > > > Rebased, with nfs parts of fmode_t patch taken out (irrelevant for > > bdev anyway and really better off in intent-killing queue). Other > > than that, it's a straight port... Same place, same branch. > > So what's your plan with this - 2.6.28? Yes. The only nastiness is around drivers/ide - there it gets a bunch of annoying conflicts from the ide-{disk,floppy}_ioctl.c splitoff. Other than that, it's trivially ported on top of current linux-next. Merge order is going to be interesting - depending on whether block merge happens before or after ide one. I'm going to put linux-next-based series on kernel.org tonight, before going to Portland... -- 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
