[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Resolved merge conflicts in next-creds
Hi James, David,

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 07:53:40 +1000 (EST) James Morris <> wrote:
> We have tried this approach thus far without success, although perhaps now
> the code has been in linux-next and you've come to the same conclusion, we
> could try again.
> David, if you want to make a minimal API-only patch set, I'll can stage it
> and push to Linus.

The important thing (and what is different in what I have proposed) is
that what you are asking Linus to take here has zero impact (i.e. you just
add a header file that noone uses and whose contents are clearly noops)
and then it is very obvious that when people start to use it, the changes
really cannot introduce a regression.

Of course, Linus has to be convinced that the long term API change is
sensible as well.

Stephen Rothwell
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-12 01:39    [W:0.036 / U:0.636 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site