From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760016AbYESOnp (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2008 10:43:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758178AbYESOni (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2008 10:43:38 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:46671 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758138AbYESOnh (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2008 10:43:37 -0400 Message-ID: <483191F9.3010706@firstfloor.org> Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 16:43:05 +0200 From: Andi Kleen User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070801) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christoph Hellwig CC: corbet@lwn.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [2/11] Add unlocked_fasync References: <20080519231.561421028@firstfloor.org> <20080519123111.97C0C1B41FF@basil.firstfloor.org> <20080519140339.GB24267@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20080519140339.GB24267@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I'd rather do a properly flag day and move lock_kernel into the > instances instead of adding this _unlocked gunk. I've considered that, but it's a bit too many fasync instances all over the tree, so I chose this method. -Andi