From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] netns support in the kobject layer Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 14:03:18 -0700 Message-ID: <20100517210318.GA6170@suse.de> References: <20100506200404.GA21805@kroah.com> <20100515.232643.212422307.davem@davemloft.net> <20100517181133.GB18721@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Greg KH , David Miller , kay.sievers@vrfy.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, bcrl@lhnet.ca, serue@us.ibm.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: "Eric W. Biederman" Return-path: Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:47469 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755677Ab0EQVDa (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 May 2010 17:03:30 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 01:58:44PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Greg KH writes: > > > On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 11:26:43PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > >> From: Greg KH > >> Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 13:04:04 -0700 > >> > >> > On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 05:35:54PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> >> > >> >> With the tagged sysfs support finally merged into Greg's tree, > >> >> it is time for the last little bits of work to get the kobject > >> >> layer and network namespaces to play together properly. > >> >> > >> >> These patches are roughly evenly divided between network layer work > >> >> and sysfs layer work. Last time this conundrum came up I believe > >> >> we decided that the easiest way to handle this was for Greg to carry > >> >> all of the patches. David, Greg does that still make sense? > >> > > >> > That's fine, if I get David's ack on these. > >> > >> Looks good to me: > >> > >> Acked-by: David S. Miller > > > > Ok. Eric, can you resend these to me when .35-rc1 is out so I can queue > > them up then to get some testing in linux-next so that they can make it > > into .36? > > Grumble. Grumble. Grumble. > > If I must I will resend these, but these patches are already in > production use, and I had them to you weeks before the merge window > closed. Yes, but they were not reviewed by the network maintainer until after the merge window closed. I already have your sysfs-namespace patches queued up for .35, and that's a big enough change for me to feel comfortable with at the moment. > Is there no way we can get these in for 2.6.35? No, sorry. One thing at a time please. thanks, greg k-h