From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Brauner Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] open: add close_range() Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 11:57:04 +0200 Message-ID: <20190524095701.b7ioi5gg573vmajh@brauner.io> References: <20190522155259.11174-1-christian@brauner.io> <67e4458a-9cc4-d1aa-608c-73ebe9e2f7a3@yandex-team.ru> <20190523163345.q5ynd2ytk7nxcvqf@brauner.io> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov , Al Viro , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux FS-devel Mailing List , Linux API , Linus Torvalds , Florian Weimer , Jann Horn , Oleg Nesterov , Thomas Gleixner , Shuah Khan , David Howells , Todd Kjos , "Dmitry V. Levin" , Miklos Szeredi , alpha , Linux ARM , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 09:43:53AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 6:33 PM Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 07:22:17PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote: > > > On 22.05.2019 18:52, Christian Brauner wrote:> This adds the close_range() syscall. It allows to efficiently close a range > > > > 22 files changed, 100 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > It would be better to split arch/ wiring into separate patch for better readability. > > > > Ok. You mean only do x86 - seems to be the standard - and then move the > > others into a separate patch? Doesn't seem worth to have a patch > > per-arch, I'd think. > > I think I would prefer the first patch to just add the call without wiring it up > anywhere, and a second patch do add it on all architectures including x86. I've split this into two patches and also bumped arm64 __NR_compat_syscalls that I've missed before as you mentioned! Thanks! Christian From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io1-f68.google.com ([209.85.166.68]:38355 "EHLO mail-io1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2390156AbfEXJ5Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 May 2019 05:57:16 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-f68.google.com with SMTP id x24so7294959ion.5 for ; Fri, 24 May 2019 02:57:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 11:57:04 +0200 From: Christian Brauner Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] open: add close_range() Message-ID: <20190524095701.b7ioi5gg573vmajh@brauner.io> References: <20190522155259.11174-1-christian@brauner.io> <67e4458a-9cc4-d1aa-608c-73ebe9e2f7a3@yandex-team.ru> <20190523163345.q5ynd2ytk7nxcvqf@brauner.io> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov , Al Viro , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux FS-devel Mailing List , Linux API , Linus Torvalds , Florian Weimer , Jann Horn , Oleg Nesterov , Thomas Gleixner , Shuah Khan , David Howells , Todd Kjos , "Dmitry V. Levin" , Miklos Szeredi , alpha , Linux ARM , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k , linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, Parisc List , linuxppc-dev , linux-s390 , Linux-sh list , sparclinux , linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, linux-arch , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , the arch/x86 maintainers Message-ID: <20190524095704.nBbOozRP5Y-bWRoGovgLTtk2PNTxzlWV2aKSYcv3jBc@z> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 09:43:53AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 6:33 PM Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 07:22:17PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote: > > > On 22.05.2019 18:52, Christian Brauner wrote:> This adds the close_range() syscall. It allows to efficiently close a range > > > > 22 files changed, 100 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > It would be better to split arch/ wiring into separate patch for better readability. > > > > Ok. You mean only do x86 - seems to be the standard - and then move the > > others into a separate patch? Doesn't seem worth to have a patch > > per-arch, I'd think. > > I think I would prefer the first patch to just add the call without wiring it up > anywhere, and a second patch do add it on all architectures including x86. I've split this into two patches and also bumped arm64 __NR_compat_syscalls that I've missed before as you mentioned! Thanks! Christian