From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lachlan McIlroy Subject: Re: linux-next: xfs tree build failure Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:05:14 +1100 Message-ID: <4918E85A.5000701@sgi.com> References: <20081030132324.0d619fdd.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20081030090832.GQ17077@disturbed> <20081105132000.4e560cad.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20081105204754.GO4985@disturbed> <20081106152753.GA9161@infradead.org> <20081107160611.d6f64fdd.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Reply-To: lachlan@sgi.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Dave Chinner , Christoph Hellwig , xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk To: Stephen Rothwell Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20081107160611.d6f64fdd.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > On Thu, 6 Nov 2008 10:27:53 -0500 Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 07:47:54AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: >>>>> I think it's probably the only solution - we need to wait until >>>>> the I_LOCK bit is cleared from the inode and AFAICT wait_on_inode() >>>>> is the only way to do it. >>>> Any resolution? >>> I was waiting on a comment from Christoph. I'll cc him directly this >>> time ;) >> What comment do you expect from me? The fix looks correct, but at some >> point you should probably run all these exports past Al to get another >> review. Especially as he's doing major work in this area currently. > > OK, I have dropped the xfs tree for today. Let me know when it is sorted > out. Okay, your fix is in and it is building again.