[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0803121255400.3557@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:59:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>,
bcrl@...ck.org, linux-aio@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] aio_write should tell userspace about partial writes
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> [ Linus, please apply. This patch was discussed and acked before,
> but somehow got lost. ]
Rusty, please *look* at your patches.
It's pretty obvious even from just the patch that the patch has already
been applied, and that the only reason you think it hasn't is that you use
some crap-for-brains SCM model where you apply patches with GNU patch and
allow fuzz, so it applied cleanly *again*.
I assume that it's quilt messing up again.
In particular, this already went in as commit
7adfa2ff3efa02a7a9f2632d2d2662d3e5eb5304, and I know for a *fact* that it
is in your tree too, since the patch itself clearly has that code double:
> && iocb->ki_nbytes - iocb->ki_left)
> ret = iocb->ki_nbytes - iocb->ki_left;
Lookie above: those two lines are part of the thing that already got
applied! If it hadn't been applied, it would look like
if ((ret == 0) || (iocb->ki_left == 0))
ret = iocb->ki_nbytes - iocb->ki_left;
instead.
I *hate* people who "merge" using patches, and then to make it even worse
use a non-zero fuzz factor.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists