From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bkl-llseek tree with the rr tree Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 16:52:44 +0200 Message-ID: <201009261652.44542.arnd@arndb.de> References: <20100915132646.4aef58f8.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <201009161020.01392.arnd@arndb.de> <20100916085608.GB8159@amit-laptop.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]:55522 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751755Ab0IZOw6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Sep 2010 10:52:58 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100916085608.GB8159@amit-laptop.redhat.com> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Amit Shah Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rusty Russell On Thursday 16 September 2010 10:56:08 Amit Shah wrote: > On (Thu) Sep 16 2010 [10:20:01], Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Thursday 16 September 2010 08:54:39 Amit Shah wrote: > > > Arnd, the device is supposed to be non-seekable so I'll add a > > > nonseekable_open() to the open() call. > > > > > > So I guess the llseek operation should ne no_llseek instead of > > > noop_llseek. Will you change that in your patchset? Should I do that > > > in the patch I'll queue up? > > > > Yes, I think it's best if you just do both changes in your patch, I'll > > drop this file from my series then. > > Great, I'll queue that up. I don't see this change in linux-next yet. What happened? Arnd