Hi guys, here is an updated version of c/r support for timerfd files. The main change
is in how @ticks are restored in patch 3 -- I switched to ioctl code, which is wrapped
with CONFIG because I still think that while there is only one ioctl designated
solely for c/r needs no need to build it all the time until explicitly requested.
Please take a look once time permit. Comments are highly appreciated.
Also note the last patch is for man-page git repo, not for kernel.
Thanks!
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:54:31PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> Hi guys, here is an updated version of c/r support for timerfd files. The main change
> is in how @ticks are restored in patch 3 -- I switched to ioctl code, which is wrapped
> with CONFIG because I still think that while there is only one ioctl designated
> solely for c/r needs no need to build it all the time until explicitly requested.
> Please take a look once time permit. Comments are highly appreciated.
> Also note the last patch is for man-page git repo, not for kernel.
>
> Thanks!
Acked-by: Andrew Vagin <[email protected]>
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:54:31PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>
> Hi guys, here is an updated version of c/r support for timerfd files. The main change
> is in how @ticks are restored in patch 3 -- I switched to ioctl code, which is wrapped
> with CONFIG because I still think that while there is only one ioctl designated
> solely for c/r needs no need to build it all the time until explicitly requested.
> Please take a look once time permit. Comments are highly appreciated.
> Also note the last patch is for man-page git repo, not for kernel.
Gentlemen, could you please point me if there something preventing the
series from being picked up? Or there some way to improve the series?
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:43:54PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:54:31PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> >
> > Hi guys, here is an updated version of c/r support for timerfd files. The main change
> > is in how @ticks are restored in patch 3 -- I switched to ioctl code, which is wrapped
> > with CONFIG because I still think that while there is only one ioctl designated
> > solely for c/r needs no need to build it all the time until explicitly requested.
> > Please take a look once time permit. Comments are highly appreciated.
> > Also note the last patch is for man-page git repo, not for kernel.
>
> Gentlemen, could you please point me if there something preventing the
> series from being picked up? Or there some way to improve the series?
Dear sirs, ping?
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:43:54PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:54:31PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi guys, here is an updated version of c/r support for timerfd files. The main change
> > > is in how @ticks are restored in patch 3 -- I switched to ioctl code, which is wrapped
> > > with CONFIG because I still think that while there is only one ioctl designated
> > > solely for c/r needs no need to build it all the time until explicitly requested.
> > > Please take a look once time permit. Comments are highly appreciated.
> > > Also note the last patch is for man-page git repo, not for kernel.
> >
> > Gentlemen, could you please point me if there something preventing the
> > series from being picked up? Or there some way to improve the series?
>
> Dear sirs, ping?
Hmm, I was waiting for a V5, but it seems you just updated that single
patch according to the review. I'll pick it up
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 06:11:58PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > Dear sirs, ping?
>
> Hmm, I was waiting for a V5, but it seems you just updated that single
> patch according to the review. I'll pick it up
Thanks a lot, Thomas!
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 06:11:58PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear sirs, ping?
> >
> > Hmm, I was waiting for a V5, but it seems you just updated that single
> > patch according to the review. I'll pick it up
>
> Thanks a lot, Thomas!
Sigh. That updated 3/4 patch does not even apply....
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:08:39PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 06:11:58PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dear sirs, ping?
> > >
> > > Hmm, I was waiting for a V5, but it seems you just updated that single
> > > patch according to the review. I'll pick it up
> >
> > Thanks a lot, Thomas!
>
> Sigh. That updated 3/4 patch does not even apply....
Maybe it's because of new -rc? Letme check...
On Wed, 16 Jul 2014, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:08:39PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 06:11:58PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear sirs, ping?
> > > >
> > > > Hmm, I was waiting for a V5, but it seems you just updated that single
> > > > patch according to the review. I'll pick it up
> > >
> > > Thanks a lot, Thomas!
> >
> > Sigh. That updated 3/4 patch does not even apply....
>
> Maybe it's because of new -rc? Letme check...
No, it's because its against an older version of your patches which
lack the #ifdef PROC_FS around the show function ....
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:16:23PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > Maybe it's because of new -rc? Letme check...
>
> No, it's because its against an older version of your patches which
> lack the #ifdef PROC_FS around the show function ....
Crap. Sorry. Thomas, I'm fetching -rc5 now, I suppose better will
be if I rebase the whole series and resend. Sounds good?
On Wed, 16 Jul 2014, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:16:23PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > >
> > > Maybe it's because of new -rc? Letme check...
> >
> > No, it's because its against an older version of your patches which
> > lack the #ifdef PROC_FS around the show function ....
>
> Crap. Sorry. Thomas, I'm fetching -rc5 now, I suppose better will
> be if I rebase the whole series and resend. Sounds good?
No rebase necessary. 1&2 apply fine. It's home made wreckage :)