Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261657AbVAGWAK (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jan 2005 17:00:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261649AbVAGV56 (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jan 2005 16:57:58 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:11425 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261616AbVAGV4K (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jan 2005 16:56:10 -0500 Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 14:00:34 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: mingo@elte.hu, hch@infradead.org, viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk, paulmck@us.ibm.com, arjan@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jtk@us.ibm.com, wtaber@us.ibm.com, pbadari@us.ibm.com, markv@us.ibm.com, greghk@us.ibm.com, torvalds@osdl.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: Restore files_lock and set_fs_root exports Message-Id: <20050107140034.46aec534.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20050107091542.GA5295@infradead.org> References: <1105039259.4468.9.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20050106201531.GJ1292@us.ibm.com> <20050106203258.GN26051@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <20050106210408.GM1292@us.ibm.com> <20050106212417.GQ26051@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <20050106152621.395f935e.akpm@osdl.org> <20050106234123.GA27869@infradead.org> <20050106162928.650e9d71.akpm@osdl.org> <20050107002624.GA29006@infradead.org> <20050107090014.GA24946@elte.hu> <20050107091542.GA5295@infradead.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2104 Lines: 49 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 10:00:14AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > so my strong position is that even asking for any 'warning period' for > > changes in VFS internals (including exports/unexports) would be > > extremely rude. No, I'd say that unexports are different. They can clearly break existing code and so should only be undertaken with caution, and with lengthy notice if possible. And it _is_ possible here, because there are no plans to change the exported functions, and it's only two lines of code, dammit. The cost to us of maintaining those two lines of code for a year is basically zero. The cost to others of us removing those two lines of code without warning is appreciable. Obvious solution: don't remove the two lines of code without warning. The only reason I can see for peremptorily removing those two lines of code is that there is some benefit to doing so which outweighs the downstream cost of doing so. Nobody has demonstrated such a benefit. > > > Unfortunately you don't have the financial and political powers IBM > has, so your opinion doesn't matter as much. Maybe you should become > OSDL member to influence the direction of Linux development. > > Christoph, it would be better to constraint yourself to commenting on other people's actions rather than entering into premature speculation regarding their motivations, especially when that speculation involves accusations of corruption. I have outlined the reasons for delaying the removal of these exports. If you can demonstrate that those reasons are invalid, and that I had good reason for also believing that those reasons are invalid then that would be an appropriate stage at which to start to speculate about ulterior motivations, thanks very much. - 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/