| To: | Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: linux-next: xfs tree build failure |
| From: | Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:05:14 +1100 |
| Cc: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-next@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20081107160611.d6f64fdd.sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20081030132324.0d619fdd.sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081030090832.GQ17077@disturbed> <20081105132000.4e560cad.sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081105204754.GO4985@disturbed> <20081106152753.GA9161@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081107160611.d6f64fdd.sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | lachlan@xxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080914) |
Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, On Thu, 6 Nov 2008 10:27:53 -0500 Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: linux-next: xfs tree build failure, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: linux-next: xfs tree build failure, Stephen Rothwell |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: linux-next: xfs tree build failure, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | Re: linux-next: xfs tree build failure, Stephen Rothwell |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |