Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] please pull file-locking related changes for v4.2
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
References: <20150713064532.04060cba@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
CC: <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
        <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>
From: Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@netapp.com>
Message-ID: <55A543A4.8060807@Netapp.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 13:15:16 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20150713064532.04060cba@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2325
Lines: 53

Hey Jeff,

On 07/13/2015 06:45 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> The following changes since commit b9243b5a5d2da4eb0a54950f4e2d6272863b48be:
> 
>   Merge branch 'parisc-4.2-1' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/deller/parisc-linux (2015-07-10 16:54:37 -0700)
> 
> are available in the git repository at:
> 
>   git://git.samba.org/jlayton/linux.git tags/locks-v4.2-1
> 
> for you to fetch changes up to ee296d7c5709440f8abd36b5b65c6b3e388538d9:
> 
>   locks: inline posix_lock_file_wait and flock_lock_file_wait (2015-07-13 06:29:11 -0400)
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> File locking related changes for v4.2 (pile #1)
> 
> I had thought that I was going to get away without a pull request this
> cycle. There was a NFSv4 file locking problem that cropped up that I
> tried to fix in the NFSv4 code alone, but that fix has turned out to be
> problematic. These patches fix this in the correct way.
> 
> Note that this touches some NFSv4 code as well. Ordinarily I'd wait for
> Trond to ACK this, but he's on holiday right now and the bug is rather
> nasty. So I suggest we merge this and if he raises issues with it we
> can sort it out when he gets back.

This looks reasonable to me, especially since Bruce and Dane have commented that it fixes their bugs.  Is my acked-by good enough?  :)

Acked-by: Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@Netapp.com>

> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Jeff Layton (5):
>       Revert "nfs: take extra reference to fl->fl_file when running a LOCKU operation"
>       locks: have flock_lock_file take an inode pointer instead of a filp
>       locks: new helpers - flock_lock_inode_wait and posix_lock_inode_wait
>       nfs4: have do_vfs_lock take an inode pointer
>       locks: inline posix_lock_file_wait and flock_lock_file_wait
> 
>  fs/locks.c         | 38 ++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>  fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c  | 18 ++++++++----------
>  include/linux/fs.h | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
>  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
> 
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/