From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760357AbXGJRSQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2007 13:18:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755094AbXGJRSB (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2007 13:18:01 -0400 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:43671 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755796AbXGJRSA (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2007 13:18:00 -0400 Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 10:15:58 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Theodore Tso Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Amit Arora , Andi Kleen , Paul Mackerras , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Arnd Bergmann , "Luck, Tony" , Heiko Carstens , Martin Schwidefsky , Mark Fasheh Subject: Re: fallocate-implementation-on-i86-x86_64-and-powerpc.patch (was: re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23) Message-Id: <20070710101558.cea7aab1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070710115251.GG2343@thunk.org> References: <20070710013152.ef2cd200.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070710115251.GG2343@thunk.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.1 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 07:52:51 -0400 Theodore Tso wrote: > On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 01:31:52AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Merge > > > > fallocate-implementation-on-i86-x86_64-and-powerpc.patch > > Andrew, > > Could you replace the comment/header section of > fallocate-implementation-on-i86-x86_64-and-powerpc.patch with the > following (attached below) ? This is from the ext4 patches, where > Amit had cleaned up description, which will make for a cleaner and > easier to understand submission into the git tree. There were issues with the x86 patch, the s390 patch was wrong and Tony wants the the ia64 patch to use a different syscall number. So I dropped everything. Let's start again from scratch. I'd suggest that for now we go with just an i386/x86_64 implementation, let the arch maintainers wire things up when that has settled down.