On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 06:55:54PM +0200, Martin Wilck wrote:
> I (being new to kernel hacking) have yet to understand what needs
> to happen for patches to enter the main branches.
You mail them to Linus, with a cc to linux-kernel.
If he likes the patch it will be part of the next (pre)release.
> [go to ftp://ftp.XX.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/aeb/ or so
> and get patches 01*, 02*, ... and apply them successively to 2.4.6pre5.
> complain to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if anything is wrong]
I see, you're going for a much deeper patch. No objections whatsoever,
that's certainly a better sol
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 04:07:33PM +0200, Martin Wilck wrote:
> > static inline unsigned int disk_index (kdev_t dev)
> > {
> > struct gendisk *g = get_gendisk(dev);
> > return g ? (MINOR(dev) >> g->minor_shift) : 0;
> > }
>
> Well,
>
> a) this is not in the official kernel,
> b)
Hi,
> On the other hand, in my tree:
>
> static inline unsigned int disk_index (kdev_t dev)
> {
> struct gendisk *g = get_gendisk(dev);
> return g ? (MINOR(dev) >> g->minor_shift) : 0;
> }
Well,
a) this is not in the official kernel,
b) the original genhd.h says that's too slow
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 09:40:56PM +0200, Martin Wilck wrote:
> no one seems to have noticed
Don't worry. The set of people who noticed was nonempty.
On the other hand, in my tree:
static inline unsigned int disk_index (kdev_t dev)
{
struct gendisk *g = get_gendisk(dev);
return
Hi,
I posted this patch already from my home mail account on June 20 (subject:
disk_index weirdness), but no one seems to have noticed - therefore I
try again. Those who _have_ noticed the other mail - sorry for bothering).
The disk_index routine erroneously adds 2 to the index of disks on the
6 matches
Mail list logo
