Re: RFC: [PATCH] staging/lustre/llite: fix O_TMPFILE/O_LOV_DELAY_CREATE conflict

["greg@kroah.com" <greg@kroah.com>]

On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:37:09AM +0000, Dilger, Andreas wrote:
> On 2014/02/10, 2:29 PM, "Al Viro" <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 08:16:52PM +0000, Dilger, Andreas wrote:
> >> >>Instead of trying to find a non-conflicting O_LOV_DELAY_CREATE flag
> >> >>or define a Lustre-specific flag that isn't of use to most/any other
> >> >>filesystems, use (O_NOCTTY|FASYNC) as the new value.  These flag
> >> >>are not meaningful for newly-created regular files and should be
> >> >>OK since O_LOV_DELAY_CREATE is only meaningful for new files.
> >
> >*shrug*
> >
> >I can live with that; it's a kludge, but it's less broken than that
> >explicit constant - that one is a non-starter, since O_... flag
> >values are arch-dependent.
> 
> Greg,
> could you please merge the original patch.  We'd like to get this into
> our pending release of the Lustre user tools and into the releases for
> older kernels (which will support both the old and new flags until the
> support for older kernels is removed).

Can you please resend the original patch, without the "RFC" line in the
subject, so I know to apply it now?

thanks,

greg k-h