[lkml]   [2007]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH -mm] fs: define file_fsync() even for CONFIG_BLOCK=n
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 10:30:20AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:06:10AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > There's nothing that is problematic for file_fsync() with CONFIG_BLOCK=n,
> > and it's built in unconditionally anyways, so move the prototype out to
> > reflect that. Without this, the unionfs build bails out.
> Unionfs should stop using it instead.

We did stop.

Josef 'Jeff' Sipek.

NT is to UNIX what a doughnut is to a particle accelerator.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-09-13 01:31    [W:0.043 / U:2.572 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site