[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 2.4 iget5_locked port attempt to 2.4
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 04:25:41PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > It's me again, I basically got no reply for this iget5_locked patch
> > > I have now. Would there be any objections if I try push it to Marcelo
> > > tomorrow? ;)
> > I just binned it. Certainly its not the kind of stuff I want to test in -ac,
> > too many VFS changes outside reiserfs
> Andrew Morton said "iget5_locked() looks simple enough, and as far as I can
> tell does not change any existing code - it just adds new stuff.",
> also this code (in its 2.5 incarnation) was tested in 2.5 for long time already.
> Also it fixes real bug (and while I have another reiserfs-only fix for the bug,
> it is fairly inelegant).

I agree it should go into 2.4 but I don't think the patches you are
submitting should go in. From what I can see they are an older version
compared to what actually went into 2.5. (I am basing this on the comments
to the functions rather than thorough code comparisons but I don't have
time to look at it more in depth atm.) Why don't you use the actual 2.5
code and make new patches or at least make use of the patches that finally
went into 2.5?

Best regards,

Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at> (replace at with @)
Linux NTFS maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on
WWW: &

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: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.091 / U:2.700 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site