From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756285AbXFKGQE (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jun 2007 02:16:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751088AbXFKGPz (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jun 2007 02:15:55 -0400 Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.230]:10526 "EHLO nz-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750934AbXFKGPy (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jun 2007 02:15:54 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=eYpLDjGQQpNhi1FMhU7cdoeY+fX79+ab6WpUq0zzI9Q//YnXl8MHDW31RBzzAWzOCietVwYzHiP5EAzBLLpY7Xn5gDqEsUexxSfWYAlwVdBM/eBroYT2k9UhmVoV34+sMD/S/yjQmoNw6sykhLc1O3+qGOaGL44bb6fDK+XBRuI= Message-ID: <466CE88B.2050803@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 15:15:39 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070307) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, greg@kroah.com, cebbert@redhat.com, sandeen@redhat.com, maneesh@in.ibm.com, cs@tequila.co.jp Subject: Re: [PATCHSET 2.6.22-rc4] sysfs: fix race conditions References: <20070611050107.GJ29122@htj.dyndns.org> <20070610231203.730d0aba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070610231203.730d0aba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.2.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton wrote: >> This patchset contains three minimal backports of fixes in -mm. With >> all patches in the patchset and sysfs-races.patch applied, kernel >> survived ~20 hours of stress test without any problem. > > So these are being proposed for 2.6.22? Yeap. > I do wonder about Rafael's bug which he bisected down to > gregkh-driver-sysfs-use-singly-linked-list-for-sysfs_dirent-tree.patch. > > If that won't be a problem in this patchset then I spose it's probably best > to go ahead with a 2.6.22 merge, but it's more a Greg thing than a me > thing. I'm currently debugging that and it's irrelevant to these fixes. The bug is introduced far after the fixes. > I don't have a tree to merge these patches into, unless I drop all the > patches which are in Greg's tree. > > Greg, can I leave it up to you to decide how we are to proceed here? I can rebase all sysfs patches in -mm on top of linus#master + these fixes if necessary. Thanks. -- tejun