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:   Thu, 2 Jan 2020 14:10:53 +0100
From:   Pali =?utf-8?B?Um9ow6Fy?= <pali.rohar@gmail.com>
To:     Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@gmail.com>
Cc:     Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@samsung.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu, hch@lst.de,
        sj1557.seo@samsung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 12/13] exfat: add exfat in fs/Kconfig and fs/Makefile
Message-ID: <20200102131053.kmvmik7aumctrih2@pali>
References: <20200102082036.29643-1-namjae.jeon@samsung.com>
 <CGME20200102082408epcas1p194621a6aa6729011703f0c5a076a7396@epcas1p1.samsung.com>
 <20200102082036.29643-13-namjae.jeon@samsung.com>
 <20200102125830.z2uz673dlsdttjvo@pali>
 <CAKYAXd9Y6o+a7q_yismLP8nNXOUqrudC3KW8N6Z05OghYLt1jg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAKYAXd9Y6o+a7q_yismLP8nNXOUqrudC3KW8N6Z05OghYLt1jg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thursday 02 January 2020 22:07:16 Namjae Jeon wrote:
> >> index 98be354fdb61..2c7ea7e0a95b 100644
> >> --- a/fs/Makefile
> >> +++ b/fs/Makefile
> >> @@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_HUGETLBFS)		+= hugetlbfs/
> >>  obj-$(CONFIG_CODA_FS)		+= coda/
> >>  obj-$(CONFIG_MINIX_FS)		+= minix/
> >>  obj-$(CONFIG_FAT_FS)		+= fat/
> >> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXFAT)		+= exfat/
> >>  obj-$(CONFIG_BFS_FS)		+= bfs/
> >>  obj-$(CONFIG_ISO9660_FS)	+= isofs/
> >>  obj-$(CONFIG_HFSPLUS_FS)	+= hfsplus/ # Before hfs to find wrapped HFS+
> >
> > Seems that all filesystems have _FS suffix in their config names. So
> > should not have exfat config also same convention? CONFIG_EXFAT_FS?
> Yeah, I know, However, That name conflicts with staging/exfat.
> So I subtracted _FS suffix.

Maybe it is a good idea to drop conflicting implementation prior merging
this series? Or at least renaming conflicting name?

You already wrote that it is "random previous snaphot" which does not
sounds as something we would like to use or support.

-- 
Pali Rohár
pali.rohar@gmail.com