[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:0.019 / U:3.776 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site