From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [patch 11/11] btrfs: The file argument for fsync() is never null
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 23:16:01 +0200
Message-ID: <20100614211601.GA27420@lst.de>
References: <20100529094907.GL5483@bicker> <201006142207.25930.johannes.hirte@fem.tu-ilmenau.de> <20100614205849.GA26828@lst.de> <20100614211120.GB5483@bicker>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Johannes Hirte <johannes.hirte@fem.tu-ilmenau.de>,
	linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Yan Zheng <zheng.yan@oracle.com>,
	Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
To: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
Return-path: <linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100614211120.GB5483@bicker>
List-ID: <linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 11:11:20PM +0200, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > Looks like you've applied the patch to a far too old kernel.  It can't
> > be NULL for quite a while already.
> > 
> 
> You're the expert, but it looks like it could be null in 2.6.34 like he
> says.  I'm just looking at vfs_fsync_range() in
> "git show v2.6.34:fs/sync.c".

2.6.34 is far too old.