From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:51:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:51:48 -0400 Received: from THANK.THUNK.ORG ([216.175.175.163]:37252 "EHLO thunk.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:51:40 -0400 Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:51:55 -0400 From: Theodore Tso To: Ben LaHaise Cc: Michael E Brown , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] blkgetsize64 ioctl Message-ID: <20010830145155.A3114@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Tso , Ben LaHaise , Michael E Brown , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i In-Reply-To: ; from bcrl@redhat.com on Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 01:12:07PM -0400 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 01:12:07PM -0400, Ben LaHaise wrote: > > No, that's not what's got me miffed. What is a problem here is that an > obvious next to use ioctl number in a *CORE* kernel api was used without > reserving it. AND PEOPLE SHIPPED IT! I for one don't go about shipping > new ABIs without reserving at least a placeholder for it in the main > kernel (or stating that the code is not bearing a fixed ABI). If the > ioctl # was in the main kernel, this mess would never have happened even > with the accidental shipping of the patch in e2fsprogs. ... and for my part, I included the patch in e2fsprogs because Ben sent me the patch, saying that people would want to test it, and I assumed he had already reserved the ioctl in the kernel. I should have checked first.... - Ted