From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8A857F52 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 10:39:59 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E7738F8049 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 08:39:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id UsYC4dUNd7R4UTJW (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 08:39:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 08:39:56 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] xfs: fix Q_XQUOTARM ioctl Message-ID: <20140423153956.GA11809@infradead.org> References: <535580A1.20806@redhat.com> <5356B986.2060906@sandeen.net> <20140423152708.GA3326@infradead.org> <5357DC3A.6060702@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5357DC3A.6060702@sandeen.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Sandeen Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Eric Sandeen , Jan Kara , xfs-oss On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:28:58AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Just out of curiousity, for what reason - just parity w/ the non-xfs > ops? Because it's just cleaner to have one methods for one operation instead of overloading them with different opts like an ioctl. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs