lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: pohmelfs: call for inclusion
On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 11:12:54PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 12:10:08PM -0800, Greg KH (gregkh@linuxfoundation.org) wrote:
> > > But that's enough for advertisement. Here is the code.
> > > I do not know whether it is a good idea to ask it for inclusion into
> > > mainline tree right now skipping drivers/staging part. But anyway, I
> > > post patch to remove drivers/staging/pohmelfs and add fs/pohmelfs
> > > If it is not the way to go, I will resubmit.
> >
> > It would be easiest to just send a patch deleting the old
> > drivers/staging/pohmelfs, or just ask me to do it, which I can, and then
> > send a new patch just with the new code, as it is so different.
>
> pohmelfs-staging-remove.diff does hust that - it removes
> drivers/staging/pohmelfs
> pohmelfs.diff adds new code into fs/pohmelfs
>
> Or did they fail to leak into maillist because of the size?
> If so, they are also accessible via
> http://www.ioremap.net/tmp/pohmelfs.diff (142 Kb)
> http://www.ioremap.net/tmp/pohmelfs-staging-remove.diff (200 Kb)

I need a signed-off-by: for any patch :)

Care to resend me just the remove patch, with the proper changelog and
signed-off-by: so that I can queue it up?

thanks,

greg k-h


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-08 21:29    [W:0.042 / U:4.352 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site