linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 1/5][TAKE2] fallocate() implementation on i86, x86

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1179664772.30468.3.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com>
Date:	Sun, 20 May 2007 07:39:32 -0500
From:	Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	cmm@...ibm.com
Cc:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	"Amit K. Arora" <aarora@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5][TAKE2] fallocate() implementation on i86, x86_64
	and powerpc

On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 16:10 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 17:36 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:

> > We've missed the -rc1 merge window, so the goal should be to make sure
> > that everything in the series file before the "unstable patches" is
> > ready for merging.
> > 
> I tend to agree.  But there are some bug-fix type or mount option
> patches that can try to target for rc2, what do you think?

I agree with Mingming.  There's no reason for these patches not to be in
mainline.  I am curious why the fallocate patches were put at the top of
the series file in the first place.  The older patches shouldn't be held
up by fallocate (which should wait until the next merge window).

Thanks,
Shaggy
-- 
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html