Re: [PATCH 50/50] CIFS: Change Makefile to support CONFIG_CIFS_SMB2

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 7:40 AM, Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 2012/1/23 Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> > On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 12:35:11 +0400
> > Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> Signed-off-by: Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >>  fs/cifs/Makefile |    4 ++++
> >>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/fs/cifs/Makefile b/fs/cifs/Makefile
> >> index 005d524..0f72f14 100644
> >> --- a/fs/cifs/Makefile
> >> +++ b/fs/cifs/Makefile
> >> @@ -15,3 +15,7 @@ cifs-$(CONFIG_CIFS_UPCALL) += cifs_spnego.o
> >>  cifs-$(CONFIG_CIFS_DFS_UPCALL) += dns_resolve.o cifs_dfs_ref.o
> >>
> >>  cifs-$(CONFIG_CIFS_FSCACHE) += fscache.o cache.o
> >> +
> >> +cifs-$(CONFIG_CIFS_SMB2) += smb2pdu.o smb2misc.o smb2transport.o maperror.o \
> >> +                         smb2inode.o smb2dir.o smb2file.o smb2readdir.o \
> >> +                         smb2link.o
> >
> >
> > I'm a bit concerned about the order of the patches. The idea here
> > seems to be: "merge all of the code needed to support SMB2 with it
> > disabled, and then flip a switch to turn it all on". Experience has
> > shown that that strategy of merging large scale changes tends to be
> > problematic.
> >
> > Bugs that creep in, but because the "switch" is in the last few patches
> > we can't bisect to narrow down the cause. What might be better is to
> > move the last few patches earlier in the series. That would allow
> > someone to mount a SMB2 filesystem, even if some things on it don't
> > actually work yet.
> >
> > If, for instance, an oops creeps in and we're not sure what's causing
> > it, we could bisect down to an earlier patch and narrow down the amount
> > of changes that we'll need to look at.
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> I agree with you. The only reason why 48,49 and 50 patches are going
> at last is that: they have been already merged in mainline before but
> then reverted back here
> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.cifs/3315.
>
> If nobody objects, I suggest them to be merged after the 01/50 patch
> (that doesn't not include any CONFIG_CIFS_SMB2 ifdefs).

Sounds fine



--
Thanks,

Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux