From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: Leak in nlmsvc_testlock for async GETFL case Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:26:06 -0700 Message-ID: <20080115042605.GT18741@parisc-linux.org> References: <48611B2F-1587-48C5-9F30-8DCFA1121CF6@Sun.COM> <20071129190848.GA17907@fieldses.org> <71BCABE5-52AD-4573-8DC0-5C57152A397B@Sun.COM> <20080114204419.GD16926@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Oleg Drokin , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: "J. Bruce Fields" Return-path: Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:53701 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750852AbYAOE0H (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 23:26:07 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080114204419.GD16926@fieldses.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 03:44:19PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > Thanks! I've queued it up for 2.6.25. Hi Bruce, I haven't had as much time to play with de-BKL-ising fs/locks.c as I would like, so fixing that for 2.6.25 is probably out of the question, but here are two janitorial patches that hopefully can be applied and will make the next steps easier. They make sense all by themselves, even if I don't get back to this project for a few months. -- Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."