Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267190AbUFZQxC (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jun 2004 12:53:02 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267189AbUFZQxC (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jun 2004 12:53:02 -0400 Received: from smtp004.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.11.35]:23450 "HELO smtp004.mail.ukl.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S267190AbUFZQwi (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jun 2004 12:52:38 -0400 From: BlaisorBlade To: Andrew Morton Subject: Inclusion of UML in 2.6.8 Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 19:05:22 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: Jeff Dike , Kernel Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200406261905.22710.blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1863 Lines: 41 Andrew, what are the requisite for stable inclusion of the UML update inside 2.6-mm (or directly 2.6.8)? Currently (splitting out a little piece, which should not be included) we have almost all the stuff inside arch/um and include/asm-um, the addition of and of two filesystems for UML use only, and this little hunk (plus 2 uses of it inside mm/page_alloc.c). +#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_FREE_PAGE +static inline void arch_free_page(struct page *page, int order) { } +#endif Could it go in as-is? I'm especially worried about having it included soon in 2.6.8, since last time it entered -mm and stayed there just for one release. The patch correctly applies to 2.6.7 and works; the current code, instead, does not even compile at all, so there is no reason for not applying it (unless you want to remove UML support / but since you never said this, we need this patch applied). However, if you don't want some parts of the code, just tell me; I'm waiting for this before preparing the UML patch to send you Also, I have some patches managed with your patch-scripts, which I'll send you after you include the UML patch. About the STATE of the code: Of the two filesystems, one (hostfs) now should work perfectly with 2.6 (I've just fixed one porting bug to 2.6, related to the force_delete() -> .drop_inode change documented in Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt); the other maybe has some problems, but I can remove it from the patch (it also will probably be replaced soon by a more generic one, i.e. externfs). Bye! -- Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade Linux registered user n. 292729 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/