On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:32:20AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 9:46 AM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 09:12:06AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> > >> Something like the attached (UNTESTED!) perhaps? > > > > Makes sense to me. ÂTesting.... > > So I found a buglet in the patch: the > > NOTE! It is very important that the FASYNC flag always > match the state "is the filp on a fasync list". > > comment should be moved to be associated with "fasync_insert_entry()" > rather than "fasync_add_entry()", since it's the insert-entry thing > that does the actual FASYNC flag handling. > > But that incorrect comment placement shouldn't affect testing, obviously ;) > > Btw, who is going to collect these things assuming it passes testing? > Arnd? You? I'll happily sign off on the fasync patch (with the comment > movement) assuming it tests out ok, but there's all the other patches > too that have been passed around. I really do want to get this into > the merge window, because it would be a big shame if we couldn't > effectively get rid of the BKL now just because of these kinds of > smallish final details, so I'm just checking who wants to step up to > the plate to collect it all together and make sure I have it? Doesn't matter to me. What I've currently got (Arnd's patches with some minor fixes from me, and your patch, all in a poorly changelogged jumble) is in git://linux-nfs.org/~bfields/linux-topics.git TMP-BKL-TESTING You wouldn't want to merge that as is, but it does seem to work. --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
