On 27 July 2011 18:08, Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2011/7/27 Per Forlin <per.forlin@xxxxxxxxxx>: > >> There is an issue with patch v4 now when fault_attr is per-host. >> Without your patch the entry is still created at the root but there >> are many instances of fault-attr. I think it's better to wait for your >> patch to make it into the mmc-next tree before submitting my patch. I >> will prepare a patch v5 that depends on your upcoming changes in >> fault-inject with a note that states the dependency. > > Or you can prepare a patch for -mm and ask Andrew to add it to the -mm > tree. > Thanks for the tip, >> Would you mind adding "patch 1/3" (export_symbol_gpl) to your >> patch-set since it depends on the new function names in your patch? >> If not, I can resend the patch on top of your changes to match the new >> function names if you prefer to have this patch separate. > > I recommend it to be a part of your patchset. The new function name > (fault_create_debugfs_attr) is not likely to change for a time. You can > add Acked-by: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@xxxxxxxxx> > Beside fault_create_debugfs_attr() the other function is should_fail. I presume this name will be changed too, and start with the fault_? Regards, Per -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
