Re: [PATCH 0/6] netns support in the kobject layer

[Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>]

On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 03:37:22PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 01:58:44PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> writes:
> >> 
> >> > On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 11:26:43PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> >> >> From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
> >> >> Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 13:04:04 -0700
> >> >> 
> >> >> > On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 05:35:54PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> With the tagged sysfs support finally merged into Greg's tree,
> >> >> >> it is time for the last little bits of work to get the kobject
> >> >> >> layer and network namespaces to play together properly.
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> These patches are roughly evenly divided between network layer work
> >> >> >> and sysfs layer work.  Last time this conundrum came up I believe
> >> >> >> we decided that the easiest way to handle this was for Greg to carry
> >> >> >> all of the patches.  David, Greg does that still make sense?
> >> >> > 
> >> >> > That's fine, if I get David's ack on these.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Looks good to me:
> >> >> 
> >> >> Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> >> >
> >> > Ok.  Eric, can you resend these to me when .35-rc1 is out so I can queue
> >> > them up then to get some testing in linux-next so that they can make it
> >> > into .36?
> >> 
> >> Grumble.  Grumble. Grumble.
> >> 
> >> If I must I will resend these, but these patches are already in
> >> production use, and I had them to you weeks before the merge window
> >> closed.
> >
> > Yes, but they were not reviewed by the network maintainer until after
> > the merge window closed.
> 
> Strictly speaking the day before but I get your point.
> 
> >  I already have your sysfs-namespace patches
> > queued up for .35, and that's a big enough change for me to feel
> > comfortable with at the moment.
> >
> >> Is there no way we can get these in for 2.6.35?
> >
> > No, sorry.  One thing at a time please.
> 
> Sure.
> 
> If we are going to push this last bit off until the 2.6.36 time frame
> Dave, Greg mind if I flip around who I send these patches to?
> 
> The big dependency is the sysfs-namespace patches which will be in
> 2.6.35, and if the patches get into net-next as well as linux-next
> there will be a larger number of potential testers.

Sure, that's fine with me.

thanks,

greg k-h