From: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@suse.de>
To: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@sophos.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.36-rc7
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 14:06:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201010081406.10190.agruen@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1286473768.2656.21.camel@dhcp231-98.rdu.redhat.com>
On Thursday 07 October 2010 19:49:28 Eric Paris wrote:
> The safest thing would probably be to punt the syscalls to 2.6.37.
> Which is sad since I know a number of people are already working against
> them, but maybe that proves it's the best approach?
I agree with removing the syscalls from 2.6.36 because of the following
reasons:
* Reviewers have complained that the feature was not ready to be merged, yet.
* At least some of the criticism did not get addressed (neither discussed nor
fixed).
* Some weaknesses in the interface design were only identified and fixed late
in the -rc phase, changing the ABI. There may be more issues, like the
priority discussion. This might leave us with a broken ABI we would need
to support forever.
(Making fanotify fit for HSM hasn't been thought through at all AFAIK but
fanotify has legitimate use cases apart from HSM, so I don't necessarily
consider this a blocker.)
* The code has shown to contain the kinds of bugs which show that it was not
tested very well before merging.
Thanks,
Andreas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-08 12:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-06 21:45 Linus Torvalds
2010-10-07 0:49 ` Stephen Rothwell
2010-10-08 15:05 ` James Bottomley
2010-10-07 16:10 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2010-10-07 17:15 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2010-10-07 17:33 ` Eric Paris
2010-10-07 18:07 ` Alan Cox
2010-10-07 17:49 ` Eric Paris
2010-10-08 12:06 ` Andreas Gruenbacher [this message]
2010-10-08 16:33 ` David Daney
2010-10-08 21:50 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-10-08 21:59 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-10-11 22:13 ` fanotify: disable fanotify syscalls Eric Paris
2010-10-08 16:38 ` Linux 2.6.36-rc7 Eric Paris
2010-10-08 21:45 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-10-07 20:55 ` John Stoffel
2010-10-07 21:24 ` Eric Paris
2010-10-08 15:42 ` John Stoffel
2010-10-08 16:17 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2010-10-08 16:41 ` Eric Paris
2010-10-18 11:01 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2010-10-08 16:54 ` John Stoffel
2010-10-08 21:03 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-10-09 0:46 ` John Stoffel
2010-10-07 19:28 ` Tejun Heo
2010-10-07 20:13 ` [dm-devel] " Milan Broz
2010-10-08 17:02 ` Tejun Heo
2010-10-10 11:56 ` Torsten Kaiser
2010-10-11 10:09 ` [PATCH wq#for-next] workqueue: fix HIGHPRI handling in keep_working() Tejun Heo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201010081406.10190.agruen@suse.de \
--to=agruen@suse.de \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tvrtko.ursulin@sophos.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome