From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sheng Yang Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] module_refcounting and anonymous inodes Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 17:43:25 +0800 Message-ID: <200812091743.26586.sheng@linux.intel.com> References: <200812021114.59050.borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <200812081251.14648.borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <493D0B9A.9000401@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Avi Kivity , Christian Borntraeger , LKML To: kvm@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mga10.intel.com ([192.55.52.92]:25875 "EHLO fmsmga102.fm.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752443AbYLIJrx (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2008 04:47:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: <493D0B9A.9000401@redhat.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Monday 08 December 2008 19:57:14 Avi Kivity wrote: > Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > Am Dienstag, 2. Dezember 2008 schrieb Christian Borntraeger: > >> Hello Avi, > >> > >> here is the latest respin of my fixes for the kvm module unload problem: > >> > >> [PATCH 1/2] anon_inodes: use fops->owner for module refcount > >> [PATCH 2/2] kvm: set owner of cpu and vm file operations > > > > In the meantime patch 2 has a offset against the latest git. Should I > > resend the patch or will you apply it anyway? > > Applied the patches; thanks for the reminder. Should we push the first patch to 2.6.28? I got some trouble with the separate 2nd patch, for I am using Linus' tree and make KVM as modules, so the reference count reduced to negative now... (Oh Avi, I know you suggest to use in kernel rather than modules, but module is indeed convenient. :) ) -- regards Yang, Sheng