Return-Path: Received: from fieldses.org ([174.143.236.118]:41828 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756414Ab1HaNrG (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Aug 2011 09:47:06 -0400 Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 09:46:52 -0400 From: "J. Bruce Fields" To: NeilBrown Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Linus Torvalds , Ben Hutchings , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] All Arch: remove linkage for sys_nfsservctl system call Message-ID: <20110831134652.GA16897@fieldses.org> References: <1312810169.2591.1153.camel@deadeye> <20110808155538.GB904@fieldses.org> <20110808180658.GC29924@decadent.org.uk> <20110826220311.GA18140@fieldses.org> <20110830085752.6db1ffa600f4c82135b3f3eb@canb.auug.org.au> <20110830091150.176cd08c@notabene.brown> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20110830091150.176cd08c@notabene.brown> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 09:11:50AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:57:52 +1000 Stephen Rothwell > wrote: > > > Hi Bruce, > > > > On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 18:03:11 -0400 "J. Bruce Fields" wrote: > > > > > > From: NeilBrown > > > > > > The nfsservctl system call is now gone, so we should remove all > > > linkage for it. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown > > > Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields > > > --- > > > > > > I don't normally have to deal with this kind of cross-architecture > > > patch; is this the right etiquette for it? > > > > It turns out (with hindsight) that my reaction to this patch should have > > been: > > > > If you haven't built this on all architectures (an noone expects you to > > actually do that), then it should spend a day or two in linux-next before > > being sent to Linus. > > > > Hi Stephen, > Thanks for your help in sorting this out. I have no idea how I missed those > few nfsservctl references but I clearly did and you and -next have proved > valuable yet again. > > And really *everything* should spend a few days in linux-next before going > to Linus. We all know that but it sometimes seem hard to *do* that .... > until we have learnt the hard way a couple of times :-( Yes, sorry, I'll know not to skip -next, next time.... (My excuse: I've been advertising to -next only stuff that I've done with and committed, and this was something I wasn't even sure I should take. But I could have either mailed it out labelled as [RFC], or stuck it in a throwaway branch to merge into my -next branch.) Apologies again, and thanks for dealing with it so promptly. --b.