Re: [PATCH] ubifs: Use empty_iops and empty_fops consistently

[Sedat Dilek]

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2011-04-04 at 11:38 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> Sorry for having flooded your inbox.
>>
>> That's ok! :-) I think I did not look carefully enough. Your patch is
>> just an additional clean-up which makes the names to be consistent. I
>> can pick it, but probably it is better if it goes in with the
>> 'empty_aops' changes? Whatever you prefer.
>>
>
> I dunno the internal organization between block-tree and fs-sub-tree
> maintainers.
> As I was in contact first with Jens in this issue, it might be a good
> idea to let this patch go through his block-tree.
>
> - Sedat -
>

Hi Artem,

can you take this patch into your UBIFS tree?
Thanks in advance.

- Sedat -
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/