Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs_vn_rename by xfs_vn_rename2

[Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Brian, Chris.

Sorry my delay to reply, I was in a software conference this week, and barely
accessed my e-mails.

I can certainly re-do this patch to avoid the name change.

I used a new name to follow the VFS convention, although I also agree we
'should' get rig of several versions and keep just newer updates to the same
syscalls.

So, I'll re-do this patch and send a V2.

Cheers


On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:35:56AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 05:04:57PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > The function rename seems unnecessary..? Meh, not a big deal to me
> > either way. Otherwise, this one seems Ok.
> 
> Yeah, we might as well keep the old name.  As far as I'm concerned
> I'd love to get rid of the two different IOPS in the VFS, too.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

-- 
Carlos