From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [patch 13/24] vfs: utimes cleanup Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 08:39:01 +0100 Message-ID: <20080515073901.GT13907@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20080506091327.259950960@szeredi.hu> <20080506091422.705393283@szeredi.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hch@infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drepper@redhat.com To: Miklos Szeredi Return-path: Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:37786 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752982AbYEOHjF (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 May 2008 03:39:05 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 12:03:46PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > + * do_futimesat - change times on filename > +int do_utimes(int dfd, char __user *filename, struct timespec *times, int flags) Erm... Is there any reason to * have do_utimes() used anywhere * _not_ have do_futimesat() called "do_utimes"?