Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 26 Oct 2018 11:05:15 -0700
From:   Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>, ooo@electrozaur.com,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        hch@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libosd: Remove ignored __weak attribute
Message-ID: <20181026180515.GA12129@flashbox>
References: <10b12992-3570-4646-374b-82cbd7276839@acm.org>
 <CAKwvOd=wgxB69dMxzMeH2edCn=TdQGPGkNVW1e=QHPTJtO9ZNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1538503063.193396.6.camel@acm.org>
 <CAKwvOdmsNEexQL9R8rgcRcXTZButYM6YWwG8bhVWCoJ8bOqCrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1538521591.193396.8.camel@acm.org>
 <20181025213144.GB24709@flashbox>
 <CAKwvOdn=TvoGdFvgxX6TyXBXnhVLttriRrZEnzS6DjcjL64DPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20181025225548.GA10326@flashbox>
 <CAKwvOdnwmf47_m_0K5OCLmXbrkLNnekpNOPCCMeJqkuqKUbQ-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <1540576908.66186.103.camel@acm.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1540576908.66186.103.camel@acm.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 11:01:48AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-10-26 at 10:54 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > If creating one instance of this variable is a functional change, I
> > can't help but suspect the original code was wrong.  But maybe Bart,
> > Boaz, or Christoph can clarify or have more thoughts on this?  Looks
> > like Boaz added this header in commit de258bf5e638 ("[SCSI] libosd:
> > OSDv1 Headers").
> 
> Hi Nick and Nathan,
> 
> Had you noticed the following e-mail from early October:
> https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=153849955503249?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.

Hi Bart,

I had but there doesn't seem to be any reply to it so I wasn't sure if
there was a final consensus on removing the driver. If that's the route
that everyone wants to go, then I guess we don't need to continue to
debate this patch.

Thanks for the heads up,
Nathan