[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201009142324.16074.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:24:15 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...e.cz>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove BKL from fs/locks.c
On Tuesday 14 September 2010 22:53:31 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Oh well. I guess there's no incremental way to do things sanely. And
> nobody has patches to fix those users, I guess.
The only critical user is fs/lockd, I can easily handle the rest.
When I talked to Bruce and Trond during LinuxCon, they told me that
it should be possible to separate the bits of fs/lockd that lock
against fs/locks.c and convert the former to use lock_flocks().
That would be enough to actually apply this patch without the
nasty CONFIG_BKL check and with changes to the few other
consumers of file locks. My original plan was to have my current
patch in -next until that happens.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists