On 10/29/2011 06:58 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 03:09:36PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >> 1: What happened with Andi's "dio: optimize cache misses in the >> submission path"? (Against which I have checkpatch fixes and >> #include linux/prefetch.h, btw) > > It has mostly been merged, including all whitespace fixes and some > folding. What is missing is the last two patchees because I don't > want to put the request_queue caching in until the remaining > lifetime issues for the request queue are sorted out, and the last > patch (which would need prefetch.h) depends on it. > >> >> 2: I'm still sitting on Andy Whitcroft's "readlinkat: ensure we >> return ENOENT for the empty pathname for normal lookups" and its >> fixup. I'd marked this as needed-in-3.1. Help. > > > >> >> From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Subject: readlinkat: ensure we return ENOENT for the empty pathname for normal lookups >> >> Since the commit below which added O_PATH support to the *at() calls, the >> error return for readlink/readlinkat for the empty pathname has switched >> from ENOENT to EINVAL: > > The fix is defintively required, I'll look over it in a bit more detail > and will push it with the next round. > >> >> 3: I'm also sitting on Hans Verkuil's "poll: add >> poll_requested_events() function". This is being merged via the v4l >> tree, based on looks-ok-to-akpm. AFAIK nobody else has looked at >> it. This should be in linux-next via the v4l tree by now, but it >> isn't, so something might have gone wrong. > > That was my assumption, too. > >> >> 4: I'm still sitting on Steve Rago's "fcntl(F_SETFL): allow setting >> of O_SYNC". I have a comment here that you said it "needs an >> audit". AFAIK nothing has happened. Should I toss it? > > This also needs all the other bits I mentioned during review. > >> 5: Tao Ma's "fs/direct-io.c: calculate fs_count correctly in >> get_more_blocks()" was missed and needs rework as a result of this >> merge. Here's what I now have. It compiles. > > Tao, can you please resend it against current Linus' tree after making > sure the upated version is still fine? OK, I will try to rebase it and do some test against it. Thanks. Tao -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
