Re: nfsd changes for 2.6.37

J. Bruce Fields
2010-10-27T17:40:50Z

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:32:20AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 9:46 AM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 09:12:06AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >>
> >> Something like the attached (UNTESTED!) perhaps?
> >
> > Makes sense to me.  Testing....
>
> So I found a buglet in the patch: the
>
> NOTE! It is very important that the FASYNC flag always
> match the state "is the filp on a fasync list".
>
> comment should be moved to be associated with "fasync_insert_entry()"
> rather than "fasync_add_entry()", since it's the insert-entry thing
> that does the actual FASYNC flag handling.
>
> But that incorrect comment placement shouldn't affect testing, obviously ;)
>
> Btw, who is going to collect these things assuming it passes testing?
> Arnd? You? I'll happily sign off on the fasync patch (with the comment
> movement) assuming it tests out ok, but there's all the other patches
> too that have been passed around. I really do want to get this into
> the merge window, because it would be a big shame if we couldn't
> effectively get rid of the BKL now just because of these kinds of
> smallish final details, so I'm just checking who wants to step up to
> the plate to collect it all together and make sure I have it?

Doesn't matter to me. What I've currently got (Arnd's patches with some
minor fixes from me, and your patch, all in a poorly changelogged
jumble) is in

git://linux-nfs.org/~bfields/linux-topics.git TMP-BKL-TESTING

You wouldn't want to merge that as is, but it does seem to work.

--b.