Greg KH [off-list ref] writes:

On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 01:31:52PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

quoted

Greg KH [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 06:39:04PM +0200, Mark Ryden wrote:

quoted

Hello,
  So I wonder: the sysfs tagged directory support patch is in GerKH
tree for more than a month.

I dropped it from my tree 2 days ago, see the thread on lkml for why.

Greg why did you drop it? 

Because Al said it was full of problems and for us not to accept it.

Yes. Al found problems.

Al reviewed sysfs with my patchset on top of it.

Al's review found problems in  sysfs with my patchset on top of it.

If you look at what Al found the majority of those problems exist in sysfs
without my patches.

Does the following sound like a workable path going forward?

- Not merge for 2.6.28 (we are to close to the merge window for everyone's comfort).

- Fix the small issues specific to tagged directory support that showed
  up in Al's review (patches sent).

- Keep the patches the entire time in a public tree that merges into
  linux-next so that people treat this code base seriously.

- Resolve the sysfs/vfs lock ordering problem mess that makes
  locking in sysfs excruciatingly difficult.

- Merge other patches to fix Als other issues with sysfs.

- Merge to 2.6.29 or wherever we are.


Eric