On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 6:53 PM, William Dauchy <wdauchy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> This should be fixed by this series of four commits that are already in >> mainline: >> bcd7f78d078ff6197715c1ed070c92aca57ec12c..ee296d7c5709440f8abd36b5b65c6 >> b3e388538d9 > > Am I missing something, I see three of them between > bcd7f78d078ff6197715c1ed070c92aca57ec12c..ee296d7c5709440f8abd36b5b65c6b3e388538d9 > (and not four) > > ee296d7c5709440f8abd36b5b65c6b3e388538d9 locks: inline > posix_lock_file_wait and flock_lock_file_wait > 83bfff23e9ed19f37c4ef0bba84e75bd88e5cf21 nfs4: have do_vfs_lock take > an inode pointer > 29d01b22eaa18d8b46091d3c98c6001c49f78e4a locks: new helpers - > flock_lock_inode_wait and posix_lock_inode_wait I suppose I found the missing one bcd7f78 locks: have flock_lock_file take an inode pointer instead of a filp -- William -- 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
