linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: block tree build failure

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]

Date:	Mon, 25 May 2009 15:54:26 +1000
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
	Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: block tree build failure

Hi Martin,

On Mon, 25 May 2009 01:38:26 -0400 "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> The accessor function patch in my patch series was explicitly put in
> place to enable changing the API without affecting users.  And we've
> tried to be careful about staging these patches in the right order
> throughout all the involved trees.

What you really need is to have the patches that introduce the accessors
in a tree common to all the possible users of them.  In practise this
often means Linus' tree - in which case the patches should introduce noop
versions of the accessors.  If that is possible, Linus is quite happy to
take those patches after which all the other users can take the
conversions into their own tree and everyone is happy.  :-)

Currently the patches that introduce the accessors only exist in the
block tree ...

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped