Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1031602AbXEAJG7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 May 2007 05:06:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1031603AbXEAJG7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 May 2007 05:06:59 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:58106 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1031602AbXEAJG6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 May 2007 05:06:58 -0400 Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 10:06:57 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Steve French Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs-client@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: SMB2 file system - should it be a distinct module Message-ID: <20070501090657.GA17949@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Steve French , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs-client@lists.samba.org References: <524f69650704301552j13cd46e5y53a233af753e0548@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <524f69650704301552j13cd46e5y53a233af753e0548@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i 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: 592 Lines: 13 On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 05:52:43PM -0500, Steve French wrote: > Any idea which would be preferred (smb2 support as part of cifs, or as > a distinct smb2.ko module)? Separate module please. If we grow enough common code as some point we can move it into a smb_common.ko helper library, but given your above description I doubt that would useful. - 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/