Hi all, This is the seventh version of this patch series (the fifth and sixth where never posted and where internal iterations only). Al Viro had concerns about silent API changes. I have made an extensive analysis of that in my comments in patch 2/4. This patch series is rebased to v3.3-rc2. The changes compared to the previously posted version are: - I have renamed the qproc field to pq_proc to prevent any driver that tries to access that directly to fail. No kernel driver does this, BTW. - I added a new poll_does_not_wait() inline that returns true if it is known that poll() will not wait on return. This removes the last reason for looking inside the poll_table struct. include/net/sock.h has been adapted to use this new inline (and it is the only place inside the kernel that need this). I hope that the analysis I made answers any remaining concerns about possible silent API changes. This patch series is also available here: http://git.linuxtv.org/hverkuil/media_tree.git/shortlog/refs/heads/pollv7 It was suggested to me that creating a new poll system call might be an option as well. I've attempted that as well and code implementing that can be found here: http://git.linuxtv.org/hverkuil/media_tree.git/shortlog/refs/heads/pollwithkey However, I think this turned out to be very messy. And because some drivers call the poll fop directly or through some framework I could not be certain I was not introducing any errors. If it is really required to change the API in some way, then I would suggest changing this: typedef struct poll_table_struct { poll_queue_proc pq_proc; unsigned long key; } poll_table; to this: struct poll_table { poll_queue_proc pq_proc; unsigned long key; }; and adapting all users. However, I honestly do not think this is necessary at all. But if it is the only way to get this in, then I'll do the work. The media/video subsystem really needs this functionality. Also note that previous versions of this patch have been in linux-next for months now. The first version of this patch was posted July 1st, 2011. I really hope that it won't take another six months to get a review from a fs developer. As this LWN article (http://lwn.net/Articles/450658/) said: 'There has been little discussion of the patch; it doesn't seem like there is any real reason for it not to go in for 3.1.' The earliest this can go in now is 3.4. The only reason it takes so long is that it has been almost impossible to get a Ack or comments or even just a simple reply from the fs developers. That is really frustrating, I'm sorry to say. Anyway, comments, reviews, etc. are very welcome. Regards, Hans -- 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
