On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 06:06:50AM -0700, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
In the light of Linus' response, and I said this to Colin already, I'll just zap a prz at boot time for pstore/console interface, which means that nowadays there shouldn't be any objections to this bunch of fixes.
These are valid fixes for v3.5, they restore old pstore's behavior nuances, which I changed accidentaly.
Except for the last patch, which is just a fix I happened to make when I got bored of the warning. :-) Not a regression fix, though.
Thanks,
fs/pstore/inode.c | 2 +- fs/pstore/ram.c | 3 +++ fs/pstore/ram_core.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++---------- include/linux/pstore_ram.h | 2 ++ 4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
Hi Greg,
Have you had a chance to look into these? Plus into "[PATCH v5 0/11] Merge ram_console into pstore" series, I believe there were no objections as well.
Thanks!
p.s. I must confess I have a huge pile of battery-related patches in my inbox that I have to review/apply, and folks start to send similar pings as I send to you now. :-) I should probably start working on my backlog to improve my karma, hehe.