On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 11:45:40PM +0200, Johannes Hirte wrote: > Am Montag 14 Juni 2010, 23:16:01 schrieb Christoph Hellwig: > > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 11:11:20PM +0200, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > > Looks like you've applied the patch to a far too old kernel. It can't > > > > be NULL for quite a while already. > > > > > > You're the expert, but it looks like it could be null in 2.6.34 like he > > > says. I'm just looking at vfs_fsync_range() in > > > "git show v2.6.34:fs/sync.c". > > > > 2.6.34 is far too old. > > For the changes yes, but not for working. I needed the btrfs fixes without all > the other bugs introduced with 2.6.35-rc. I was to careless and pulled to much > changes in. My fault. Well, my fault. I usually keep the btrfs-unstable tree against one release old, and the users have come to expect it. I'll make a .34 branch that works. -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
