On 5/31/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Could you please send a fresh, shiny, new, changelogged patch against mainline?
OK, here it is. It would be nice to merge this before final 2.6.22
release. Thank you.
The kernel on-demand loop device instantiation breaks several user spac
On Thu, 31 May 2007 11:23:32 -0700
"Ken Chen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/31/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have a note here that it needs additional work. This discussion:
> >
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/21/602
> >
> > seemed to peter out and go nowhere?
>
> The fi
On 5/31/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have a note here that it needs additional work. This discussion:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/21/602
seemed to peter out and go nowhere?
The first rev went in -mm needs work and the above url is the result
of feedback from Al Viro. He al
On Thu, 31 May 2007 09:51:36 -0700
"Ken Chen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/31/07, walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ken Chen wrote:
> > > On 5/21/07, Ken Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ...
> > > tested, like this?
> >
> > Ken, your patch below works for me. Are you going to send this
On 5/31/07, walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ken Chen wrote:
> On 5/21/07, Ken Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> tested, like this?
Ken, your patch below works for me. Are you going to send this
on to Linus?
I think akpm will route this to Linus. andrew?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: s
Ken Chen wrote:
On 5/21/07, Ken Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
tested, like this?
Ken, your patch below works for me. Are you going to send this
on to Linus?
diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
index 5526ead..0ed5470 100644
--- a/drivers/block/loop.c
+++ b/drivers
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 07:40:14PM -0700, Ken Chen wrote:
> tested, like this?
ACK. Could merge loop_init_one() into the only remaining caller,
but it won't make the code simpler, so let's leave it at that.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of
On 5/21/07, Ken Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/21/07, Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, it doesn't. Really. It's easy to split; untested incremental to your
> patch follows:
>
> for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
> - if (!loop_init_one(i))
> - go
On 5/21/07, Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No, it doesn't. Really. It's easy to split; untested incremental to your
patch follows:
for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
- if (!loop_init_one(i))
- goto err;
+ lo = loop_alloc(i);
+
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 06:30:15PM -0700, Ken Chen wrote:
> On 5/21/07, Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 03:00:55PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> + if (register_blkdev(LOOP_MAJOR, "loop"))
> >> + return -EIO;
> >> + blk_register_region(MKDEV(L
On 5/21/07, Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 03:00:55PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> + if (register_blkdev(LOOP_MAJOR, "loop"))
> + return -EIO;
> + blk_register_region(MKDEV(LOOP_MAJOR, 0), range,
> + THIS_MODULE, l
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 03:00:55PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> + if (register_blkdev(LOOP_MAJOR, "loop"))
> + return -EIO;
> + blk_register_region(MKDEV(LOOP_MAJOR, 0), range,
> + THIS_MODULE, loop_probe, NULL, NULL);
> +
> + for (i = 0; i
12 matches
Mail list logo
