Re: [PATCH 1/1] Constify struct sysfs_ops for v2.6.33-rc4
From: Emese Revfy
Date: Sun Jan 17 2010 - 15:14:37 EST
Al Viro wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 06:25:37PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 05:20:38PM +0100, Emese Revfy wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Emese Revfy <re.emese@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Acked-by: David Teigland <teigland@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Acked-by: Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@xxxxxxxx>
>>> Acked-by: Maciej Sosnowski <maciej.sosnowski@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Acked-by: Hans J. Koch <hjk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Acked-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Acked-by: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> NACKed-by: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Same reason.
> BTW, commit 9905a43b2d563e6f89e4c63c4278ada03f2ebb14
> Author: Emese Revfy <re.emese@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon Dec 14 00:58:57 2009 +0100
> backlight: Constify struct backlight_ops
> is also crap; again, same reason. Would you please get a clue and stop
> pushing that particular bullshit into the tree?
The backlight maintainer accepted that patch before the discussion
on field constification concluded.
I drew his attention to the discussion (http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/16/395)
but he still accepted the patch as is.
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/