From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752537Ab2LFMFj (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Dec 2012 07:05:39 -0500 Received: from 173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([173.166.109.252]:55070 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750826Ab2LFMFh (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Dec 2012 07:05:37 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 07:05:33 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Martin Steigerwald , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Dave Chinner , "Theodore Ts'o" , linux-fsdevel Subject: Re: [PATCH, 3.7-rc7, RESEND] fs: revert commit bbdd6808 to fallocate UAPI Message-ID: <20121206120532.GA14100@infradead.org> References: <1353366267-15629-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20121126025520.GC22858@thunk.org> <20121126091202.GO32450@dastard> <201212051148.28039.Martin@lichtvoll.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 07:45:39AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > > > Linus, while I am interested in an answer I think that Dave and Christoph > > as Linux filesystem developers actually deserve one (instead of silently > > being ignored which is also a decision in this matter). > > > > I did not see an answer in linux-2.6 commit log as of today so far. > > Christ guys. This whole thread is retarded. > > The *ONLY* reason people seem to have for reverting that is a "ooh, my > feelings are hurt by how this was done, and now I'm a pissy bitch and > I want to get this reverted". > > Stop the f*cking around already. > > If you want something reverted, you show me the *technical* reason for > it. Not the "ooh, I'm so annoyed by how this was done" reason for it. > > And if your little feelings got hurt, get your mommy to tuck you in, > don't email me about it. Because I'm not exactly known for my deep > emotional understanding and supportive personality, am I? No, the problem is that the thing is not just a) wrong, but b) only made it in through sneaky ways.