From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Gruenbacher Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.36-rc7 Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 14:06:09 +0200 Message-ID: <201010081406.10190.agruen@suse.de> References: <20101007190741.2dc62626@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <1286473768.2656.21.camel@dhcp231-98.rdu.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Alan Cox , Tvrtko Ursulin , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Eric Paris Return-path: Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:48960 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753504Ab0JHMGp (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Oct 2010 08:06:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1286473768.2656.21.camel@dhcp231-98.rdu.redhat.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thursday 07 October 2010 19:49:28 Eric Paris wrote: > The safest thing would probably be to punt the syscalls to 2.6.37. > Which is sad since I know a number of people are already working against > them, but maybe that proves it's the best approach? I agree with removing the syscalls from 2.6.36 because of the following reasons: * Reviewers have complained that the feature was not ready to be merged, yet. * At least some of the criticism did not get addressed (neither discussed nor fixed). * Some weaknesses in the interface design were only identified and fixed late in the -rc phase, changing the ABI. There may be more issues, like the priority discussion. This might leave us with a broken ABI we would need to support forever. (Making fanotify fit for HSM hasn't been thought through at all AFAIK but fanotify has legitimate use cases apart from HSM, so I don't necessarily consider this a blocker.) * The code has shown to contain the kinds of bugs which show that it was not tested very well before merging. Thanks, Andreas