[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190424171926.GA17719@sasha-vm>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 13:19:26 -0400
From: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Kirill Smelkov <kirr@...edi.com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Yongzhi Pan <panyongzhi@...il.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>,
Nikolaus Rath <Nikolaus@...h.org>,
Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@...gle.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.0 59/66] fs: stream_open - opener for
stream-like files so that read and write can run simultaneously without
deadlock
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 09:40:53AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 9:34 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
><gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> I think there is a follow-on patch for this one as well, that adds the
>> proper "stream open" logic to all of the individual locations.
>
>That bulk one hasn't been applied yet, and wouldn't be appropriate for
>stable anyway. It's 5.2 material.
Hm, I might be confusing something here but I see a bunch of patches
that convert existing callers mentioned in this patch to use
stream_open() which was introduced here.
Are these the same patches you're referring to? If so, why are they not
appropriate for stable?
--
Thanks,
Sasha
Powered by blists - more mailing lists