Re: interims VFS queue

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>]

On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 03:09:36PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> 1: What happened with Andi's "dio: optimize cache misses in the
>    submission path"?  (Against which I have checkpatch fixes and
>    #include linux/prefetch.h, btw)

It has mostly been merged, including all whitespace fixes and some
folding.  What is missing is the last two patchees because I don't
want to put the request_queue caching in until the remaining
lifetime issues for the request queue are sorted out, and the last
patch (which would need prefetch.h) depends on it.

> 
> 2: I'm still sitting on Andy Whitcroft's "readlinkat: ensure we
>    return ENOENT for the empty pathname for normal lookups" and its
>    fixup.  I'd marked this as needed-in-3.1.  Help.



> 
> From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>
> Subject: readlinkat: ensure we return ENOENT for the empty pathname for normal lookups
> 
> Since the commit below which added O_PATH support to the *at() calls, the
> error return for readlink/readlinkat for the empty pathname has switched
> from ENOENT to EINVAL:

The fix is defintively required, I'll look over it in a bit more detail
and will push it with the next round.

> 
> 3: I'm also sitting on Hans Verkuil's "poll: add
>    poll_requested_events() function".  This is being merged via the v4l
>    tree, based on looks-ok-to-akpm.  AFAIK nobody else has looked at
>    it.  This should be in linux-next via the v4l tree by now, but it
>    isn't, so something might have gone wrong.

That was my assumption, too. 

> 
> 4: I'm still sitting on Steve Rago's "fcntl(F_SETFL): allow setting
>    of O_SYNC".  I have a comment here that you said it "needs an
>    audit".  AFAIK nothing has happened.  Should I toss it?

This also needs all the other bits I mentioned during review.

> 5: Tao Ma's "fs/direct-io.c: calculate fs_count correctly in
>    get_more_blocks()" was missed and needs rework as a result of this
>    merge.  Here's what I now have.  It compiles.

Tao, can you please resend it against current Linus' tree after making
sure the upated version is still fine?