From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from arrakis.dune.hu ([78.24.191.176]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1WjrGG-0005Db-8a for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 12 May 2014 14:31:25 +0000 Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 16:30:59 +0200 From: Luka Perkov To: Richard Weinberger Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: add a ubi forced detach ioctl Message-ID: <20140512143059.GA32013@w500.lan> References: <1399850250-24616-1-git-send-email-luka@openwrt.org> <53709292.6070600@phrozen.org> <20140512104400.GA24995@w500.lan> <5370D0E5.4040800@nod.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5370D0E5.4040800@nod.at> Cc: Artem Bityutskiy , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , John Crispin , John Crispin List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 03:47:17PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 12.05.2014 12:44, schrieb Luka Perkov: > > On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:21:22AM +0200, John Crispin wrote: > >> This is a ugly temporary patch that we carry around in openwrt until we > >> have a real fix. why are you trying to upstream this ? > > > > I didn't think this is a hack, other file systems can force umount as > > well. What are you proposing as a real fix? > > You're messing with UBI, not UBIFS. :-) True. > So, what problem is your patch solving and why do we need it upstream? You can drop it. Thanks! Luka