From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751880Ab2IIL3N (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 9 Sep 2012 07:29:13 -0400
Received: from mail.parknet.co.jp ([210.171.160.6]:36821 "EHLO
	mail.parknet.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751013Ab2IIL3M (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 9 Sep 2012 07:29:12 -0400
From: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
To: "Steven J. Magnani" <steve@digidescorp.com>
Cc: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@gmail.com>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, bfields@fieldses.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@samsung.com>,
        Ravishankar N <ravi.n1@samsung.com>,
        Amit Sahrawat <a.sahrawat@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] fat: allocate persistent inode numbers
References: <1346774264-8031-1-git-send-email-linkinjeon@gmail.com>
	<20120904161747.GJ23464@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
	<CAKYAXd_wTxqbC-UxYimCkZtvSddx=f3FG0hoiEY_doMjoxkKog@mail.gmail.com>
	<87harc34d9.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp>
	<CAKYAXd-8aztDe1QiFT=NSQX8J+h_FM+cAWwo+Q+fUQHpNGTctw@mail.gmail.com>
	<87y5knz6l5.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp>
	<CAKYAXd_mxq26bhRYd-YM9OBjYMO12TD4wHxm6PqHBLjgGFHaZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKYAXd-QtSYy4SQErVTXrxcv=YhFzhOm3PKpj=HoZKmpAG7vGQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1347020137.2223.13.camel@iscandar.digidescorp.com>
	<87oblfpmnb.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp>
Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2012 20:29:06 +0900
In-Reply-To: <87oblfpmnb.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> (OGAWA Hirofumi's message of
	"Sun, 09 Sep 2012 18:32:08 +0900")
Message-ID: <87k3w3ph8d.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.50 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp> writes:

> What is your use case?  I'm assuming current NFS support of FAT is not
> unstable behavior even with your patches. Is this true?

s/is not unstable/is still unstable/
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>