From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 14:26:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 14:26:10 -0500 Received: from phoenix.mvhi.com ([195.224.96.167]:24325 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 14:26:09 -0500 Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 19:36:44 +0000 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl Cc: hch@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] register_blkdev Message-ID: <20030307193644.A14196@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl on Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 08:32:01PM +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 08:32:01PM +0100, Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote: > > IMHO that's a bad change, (un)register_blkdev should just go away > > completly. > > Yes, it would be best if the kernel became perfect at once. > But the patch is rather large. Better go in small steps. > > Did you read the patch? Yes, I did. What I object to is the prototype changes you did which make absolutely no sense to get into 2.5 now when the functions will disappear before 2.6. Feel free to change the actual implementation, I couldn't care less on you wasting your time on that :)