Hi Jörn,
On Wed, 2 Nov 2011 20:00:46 +0100 Jörn Engel <joern@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 1 November 2011 14:10:00 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the logfs tree got a conflict in
> > fs/logfs/file.c between commit 02c24a82187d ("fs: push i_mutex and
> > filemap_write_and_wait down into ->fsync() handlers") from Linus' tree
> > and commit 39da12ef4bbe ("logfs: take write mutex lock during fsync and
> > sync") from the logfs tree.
> >
> > I have no idea what needs to be done here. I fixed it like below to make
> > it build, but a better fix is needed.
>
> From a code perspective your fix below is correct, to the best of my
> judgement. I'm less sure what to do from a git perspective.
> Explicitly tell Linus about it in the logfs pull request?
I was concered about the locking order (or if both locks were needed at
all). And, yes, tell Linus.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Attachment:
pgpyLvMzdM1C7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
