[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201009161020.01392.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 10:20:01 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Amit Shah <amit.shah@...hat.com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bkl-llseek tree with the rr tree
On Thursday 16 September 2010 08:54:39 Amit Shah wrote:
> Arnd, the device is supposed to be non-seekable so I'll add a
> nonseekable_open() to the open() call.
>
> So I guess the llseek operation should ne no_llseek instead of
> noop_llseek. Will you change that in your patchset? Should I do that
> in the patch I'll queue up?
Yes, I think it's best if you just do both changes in your patch, I'll
drop this file from my series then.
Any driver that we can make use no_llseek instead of noop_llseek
is a step forward.
Arnd
--
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