From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benjamin LaHaise Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the aio tree with the vfs tree Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 09:12:44 -0400 Message-ID: <20160315131244.GM17923@kvack.org> References: <20160315150640.02a4db30@canb.auug.org.au> <20160315043448.GE17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20160315050712.GF17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20160315051939.GG17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from kanga.kvack.org ([205.233.56.17]:60075 "EHLO kanga.kvack.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751615AbcCONMt (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Mar 2016 09:12:49 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160315051939.GG17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Al Viro Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 05:19:39AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 05:07:12AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > > > There *is* a reason for code review. Or, at least, asking somebody familiar > > with the code you are working with whether some assumption you are making > > is true or false. Me, for example, in our conversation regarding earlier parts > > of aio.git queue about a week ago. Or at any other point. > > While we are at it, 150a0b49 ("aio: add support for async openat()") is also > crap. fs_struct and files_struct is nowhere near enough. And yes, I realize > that your application probably doesn't step into it. Which means that these > patches are just fine for your private kernel. _Not_ for mainline. > > Reviewed-and-NAKed-by: Al Viro You've had two months to make this comment, so I'm glad you've finally done so. -ben -- "Thought is the essence of where you are now."