Re: [patch 03/12] uml: export getgid for hostfs

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 03:02:28AM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
> In this moment I need to clean up the missing symbol. If anyone wants to 
> remove the code using this, then he might post a patch explictly removing it, 
> and getting it refused probably.
> 
> Or at least CC uml-devel when discussing those problems. I'm not currently 
> able to find on marc.theaimsgroup.com the mail you talk about. Can you please 
> provide the URL to the discussion? (even on any other archive you like, 
> obviously).

My unaswered reply to the first submission is at

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/linux.kernel/messages/de9504fe5963ccd1,0c05294c599b22b1,eab26a4ed3f8ff17?thread_id=16c905c7e28e7498&mode=thread&noheader=1&q=uml-export-getgid-for-hostfs#doc_eab26a4ed3f8ff17

(sorry, couldn't find it on marc), it's been Cc'ed to the lists you sent
the patch to.

> That said, there are people still using that code, so it should be kept in.

But the code is totally bogus, so it should _not_ be kept.

> Also, you blocked an important patch (the one adding ->release to 
> hw_interrupt_type) saying that *perhaps* UML should avoid having any hard 
> irq, a la S390. You forced so the merge of a very ugly patch manually calling 
> what should have been UML's release method (i.e. free_irq_by_irq_and_dev) in 
> every place calling free_irq() (and in fact one was missed at first). Might 
> you reconsider your position on that issue ? (URL of the discussion below)
> 
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&w=2&r=3&s=uml+irq&q=b
> 
> The patch adding the generic handling is this one:
> 
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=109834481320519&w=2

I still think it's a really bad idea.  But I'm not the irq code maintainer,
it could very well be Ingo overrides me.