From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 17:15:24 +0100 Subject: [lustre-devel] Remaining work needed for moving Lustre out of staging In-Reply-To: <0F617FFB-4BD0-4477-890B-2CDC56436DCC@intel.com> References: <1E1B324A-F545-417D-9C35-550FA58665C7@intel.com> <20161203085550.GA5375@kroah.com> <0F617FFB-4BD0-4477-890B-2CDC56436DCC@intel.com> Message-ID: <20161206161524.GA5535@kroah.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Oleg Drokin Cc: "Dilger, Andreas" , "viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org" , "jsimmons@infradead.org" On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 10:34:03AM -0500, Oleg Drokin wrote: > > On Dec 3, 2016, at 3:55 AM, gregkh at linuxfoundation.org wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 09:53:08PM +0000, Dilger, Andreas wrote: > >> Al, > >> Greg recently raised the issue of what still needs to be done to > >> move the Lustre code out of staging/ and into the fs/ tree. > >> > >> James has been doing a great job of cleaning up various checkpatch > >> issues and keeping the code updated with the latest fixes, but we > >> were wondering what you were aware of that needed to be cleaned > >> up in Lustre? > > > > Is the whole "mixing kernel structures in userspace structures" all > > resolved now? For some reason I thought that you had kernel locks being > > passed to userspace and then back into the kernel, but it's been a long > > time since I last looked... > > While we certainly had our share of mixing user/kernelspace structures, > I don't think we ever passed anything with locks around back and forth. > > I just did a brief check and I don't see anything glaring on this particular front. > > > If you feel you are ready for a "real" review, I'll be glad to go over > > the code before the vfs people look at it, just let me know. No need to > > bother them if you still have basic things wrong that I can find? > > I think this would be beneficial at this stage. I see loads of checkpatch.pl warnings and a few errors, how about fixing all of them up first? thanks, greg k-h From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:43538 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751492AbcLFQPS (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2016 11:15:18 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 17:15:24 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Oleg Drokin Cc: "Dilger, Andreas" , "viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org" , "jsimmons@infradead.org" Subject: Re: Remaining work needed for moving Lustre out of staging Message-ID: <20161206161524.GA5535@kroah.com> References: <1E1B324A-F545-417D-9C35-550FA58665C7@intel.com> <20161203085550.GA5375@kroah.com> <0F617FFB-4BD0-4477-890B-2CDC56436DCC@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <0F617FFB-4BD0-4477-890B-2CDC56436DCC@intel.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 10:34:03AM -0500, Oleg Drokin wrote: > > On Dec 3, 2016, at 3:55 AM, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 09:53:08PM +0000, Dilger, Andreas wrote: > >> Al, > >> Greg recently raised the issue of what still needs to be done to > >> move the Lustre code out of staging/ and into the fs/ tree. > >> > >> James has been doing a great job of cleaning up various checkpatch > >> issues and keeping the code updated with the latest fixes, but we > >> were wondering what you were aware of that needed to be cleaned > >> up in Lustre? > > > > Is the whole "mixing kernel structures in userspace structures" all > > resolved now? For some reason I thought that you had kernel locks being > > passed to userspace and then back into the kernel, but it's been a long > > time since I last looked... > > While we certainly had our share of mixing user/kernelspace structures, > I don't think we ever passed anything with locks around back and forth. > > I just did a brief check and I don't see anything glaring on this particular front. > > > If you feel you are ready for a "real" review, I'll be glad to go over > > the code before the vfs people look at it, just let me know. No need to > > bother them if you still have basic things wrong that I can find… > > I think this would be beneficial at this stage. I see loads of checkpatch.pl warnings and a few errors, how about fixing all of them up first? thanks, greg k-h