Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261676AbVDEJkM (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Apr 2005 05:40:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261661AbVDEJfN (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Apr 2005 05:35:13 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:47070 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261208AbVDEJdG (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Apr 2005 05:33:06 -0400 Subject: Re: 2.6.12-rc2-mm1 From: Arjan van de Ven To: Paul Mackerras Cc: Dave Airlie , Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <16978.22617.338768.775203@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> References: <20050405000524.592fc125.akpm@osdl.org> <20050405074405.GE26208@infradead.org> <21d7e99705040502073dfa5e5@mail.gmail.com> <16978.22617.338768.775203@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 11:33:00 +0200 Message-Id: <1112693580.6275.33.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-2) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 2.63 on pentafluge.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (3.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.1 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org [] 2.5 RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK RBL: Sent directly from dynamic IP address [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1022 Lines: 27 On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 19:20 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote: > Dave Airlie writes: > > > Paulus these look like your patches care to update them with the "new" > > method of doing stuff.. > > What are we going to do about the DRM CVS? Change it to the new way > and break everyone running 2.6.10 or earlier, or leave it at the old > way that will work for people with distro kernels, and have a > divergence between it and what's in the kernel? (some distros like Fedora Core have modern kernels even for older releases) > Also, the compat_ioctl method is called without the BKL held, unlike > the ioctl method. What impact will that have? Do we need to take the > BKL in the compat_ioctl method? How much does DRM actually depend on the BKL? I would hope not too 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/