From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs: Do not dispatch FITRIM through separate super_operation Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 06:06:30 -0700 Message-ID: <20101118130630.GJ6178@parisc-linux.org> References: <1290065809-3976-1-git-send-email-lczerner@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: tytso@mit.edu, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, sandeen@redhat.com, Josef Bacik To: Lukas Czerner Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1290065809-3976-1-git-send-email-lczerner@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 08:36:48AM +0100, Lukas Czerner wrote: > There was concern that FITRIM ioctl is not common enough to be included > in core vfs ioctl, as Christoph Hellwig pointed out there's no real point > in dispatching this out to a separate vector instead of just through > ->ioctl. Um, are you and Josef working independently of each other? You don't seem to be cc'ing each other on your patches, and you're basically doing the same thing. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."